Post: #1

People in nations like the UK where it was previously too politically incorrect to ask questions about the costs and negative impacts of obesity are actually starting to ask those questions. What's more, they're doing it in public and they are being heard.

Dialogue about obesity is no longer being shut down automatically in order to protect "feelings". People are now having open, rational discussions about the costs of obesity and, in the process, they are accepting that these costs are very real and very expensive. They simply differ on how best to deal with the issue.

The seemingly widespread and growing acceptance of obesity's costs even among those who "advocate" for less stringent measures against them (witness the opposing views in the latter half of the video below) indicates the failure of fat acceptance.

I'm cautiously optimistic-we'll see if this more rational tone continues. If it does, fat acceptance may be well on its way to a slow, painful and well deserved death.

Post: #2

To be honest, in the UK, it was never as politically incorrect to talk about this as it is in America. What is still politically incorrect is fat shaming overweight, but not obese, people.

Post: #3

I think in the end it will come down to money. Obese citizens are very expensive to take care of, and as economies get strained, they will be more suspicious of anything which drains the nation's coffers. Ideologies and movements are only beneficial as long at it benefits the state. Feminism is beneficial partly because it gets women working (more tax payers for government) while keeping wages low (benefit to corporations, which partially control the state).

Post: #4

If Feminism is so beneficial to the state, what will it take to defeat it?

Post: #5

Down here in Fatlanta, there's been a hard campaign to fat shame:

http://thestir.cafemom.com/big_kid/13092...e_fat_kids


While at the same time, the AMA has labeled obesity as a disease.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreykaba...g-mistake/

With Obamacare in place, I wonder what the relationship between the two will be. It sounds like the gov't is setting up to treat every lard ass in the U.S. That will sink the system.

Post: #6

I think Roosh is on the right path. Especially with England their public health, obese people present an obstacle to the NHS in terms of cost. They effectively raise the cost for everyone else.

Post: #7

(08-11-2013 04:52 AM)Teedub Wrote:  To be honest, in the UK, it was never as politically incorrect to talk about this as it is in America. What is still politically incorrect is fat shaming overweight, but not obese, people.

Yup. It wasn't uncommon to hear people call someone a fat cunt or a fat bastard. It wasn't just broadcasted on tv as mantra but they didn't sweep it under the carpet like PC-ville Canada. In Toronto, I once made a comment about weight and I was viewed as if I mentioned something about the Austrian chap with the black moustache.

I think the thing is, which is more profitable? The bills paid by the fats or the money saved from having to treat them? Because fat people are profitable for the medical industry as well as the food industry. They work hand in hand like Mike and Scottie.

Post: #8

(08-11-2013 07:04 AM)Teedub Wrote:  If Feminism is so beneficial to the state, what will it take to defeat it?

The starving of the state. Starve the state and the hamster has no fuel.

Post: #9

Some fat acceptance should be tolerated:


   

Post: #10

(08-11-2013 07:04 AM)Teedub Wrote:  If Feminism is so beneficial to the state, what will it take to defeat it?

http://www.rooshv.com/why-feminism-in-america-will-die

Post: #11

I am curious if fat people, especially obese people who generally die much earlier, would actually save the government years of paying retirement benefits (SSI in US not sure term for UK) and so the short term high costs of healthcare for them is actually worth it compared to the long term costs of paying them retirement since they die younger.

For instance, whats more economical a 350lbs man/woman dying of a stroke/heartattack at 60, who probably does go to the doctor more take more meds etc maybe even a bypass surgery or toe removal (for diabetes) but then dying at age young enough where they never collected retirement benefits.

Compared to say a fit/healthy low bmi man/woman dying of a stroke/heart attack at age 86. These people only begin to visit the doctor in their final years of life but still for minor things. However they have been getting retirement benefits for 20 years and not been working for that long as well.

I am not an economist but it seems like these costs could be even or even less expensive for the obese person who dies younger. Thoughts?

Post: #12

Obesity is often responsible for expensive care like diabetes, CVD, arthritis and mental health. I think a healthier person would simply not use as much health care as someone who needs to go to a doctor every 3 to 6 months.

Post: #13

I remember reading that obese people actually save the healthcare system money since they die younger. (If that sounds familiar, it's because the same was true of cigarette smokers.) Not sure if it's true, but it does make sense.

It's the end of life treatment that is screwing our healthcare system over. My grandma (who didn't want to be alive but was kept alive by the system) probably cost the healthcare system over 1 million dollars for the last year of her life.

I think the stat is something like this: The average person costs the system more in her last 6 months of life than in the person's entire life up to that point.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-6747002.html

One of her doctors, Ira Byock, told "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft it costs up to $10,000 a day to maintain someone in the intensive care unit. Some patients remain here for weeks or even months; one has been there for six months.

"This is the way so many Americans die. Something like 18 to 20 percent of Americans spend their last days in an ICU," Byock told Kroft. "And, you know, it's extremely expensive. It's uncomfortable. Many times they have to be sedated so that they don't reflexively pull out a tube, or sometimes their hands are restrained. This is not the way most people would want to spend their last days of life. And yet this has become almost the medical last rites for people as they die."

Post: #14

^ That's another reason why I think you should be able to commit suicide in your last days if you wish. There's a place in Switzerland where people can do it.

Post: #15

I think obesity is a good thing for young Americans.

What is really holding back the U.S.? There are many issues but ultimately it's old people holding you back.

Something like 75% of professors aged 59-65 said they will NEVER retire. Since they have lifetime tenure, nothing can be done to get rid of them.

So now you have a bunch of people with PhDs in their 20s and 30s who are forced to work as slave labor. They are lucky to earn $20,000 a year while old professors who just phone it in earn $100,000 or more.

Old people are working far too long in nearly every profession. But you can't get rid of them because of age discrimination laws and because old people have the political power.

If people would die sooner, this would create more economic opportunities for the young.

What would happen to the college grad unemployment rate (at 25%, last I checked) if everyone over 65 suddenly dropped dead?

We've all be living in the 1950s again, with ample jobs providing a living wage.

If obesity causes people to die sooner, the economy will grow and there will be more prosperity in the U.S.

So the obesity epidemic might be a blessing. We'll see.

Post: #16

(08-11-2013 11:24 AM)MikeCF Wrote:  I think obesity is a good thing for young Americans.

What is really holding back the U.S.? There are many issues but ultimately it's old people holding you back.

Something like 75% of professors aged 59-65 said they will NEVER retire. Since they have lifetime tenure, nothing can be done to get rid of them.

So now you have a bunch of people with PhDs in their 20s and 30s who are forced to work as slave labor. They are lucky to earn $20,000 a year while old professors who just phone it in earn $100,000 or more.

Old people are working far too long in nearly every profession. But you can't get rid of them because of age discrimination laws and because old people have the political power.

If people would die sooner, this would create more economic opportunities for the young.

What would happen to the college grad unemployment rate (at 25%, last I checked) if everyone over 65 suddenly dropped dead?

We've all be living in the 1950s again, with ample jobs providing a living wage.

If obesity causes people to die sooner, the economy will grow and there will be more prosperity in the U.S.

So the obesity epidemic might be a blessing. We'll see.

This would be true if these fat people just dropped dead, but they don't. They hold on, thanks to the advances in modern health that regulate their cholesterol, lower their heart rate, and control their diabetic attacks. Furthermore, the people who are--demographically speaking--the fattest tend to be the poor, in lower-end jobs that PhDs and other educated young people aren't looking to get into.

Truth be told, the obesity epidemic and the white-collar "career crisis" are separate phenomena. It'd be nice if they merely cancelled each other out but, instead, they're actually two independent problems individually adding massive pressure to a society already in crisis.

Post: #17

How much of that 10,000 a day was insane profit?

Post: #18

It's been failed to mention that besides clogging up the healthcare system, fat people end up on disability and other entitlement programs early. They are draining the system in more ways than one.

Post: #19

(08-11-2013 07:04 AM)Teedub Wrote:  If Feminism is so beneficial to the state, what will it take to defeat it?

The coming collapse of the welfare state will end feminism and a lot of other current cultural trends.Western societies will be very different in the aftermath

Post: #20

The end of fat acceptance (same with the end of feminism) would be world war III.
You'd get Rosie the Riveter bullshit with the US government blowing smoke up everybody's asses about how women are no different than men because they can run a screwdriver or a nail gun, but once the few survivors returned home to find that a whole generation of men died out and women outnumber men something like 2.5 to 1, obesity and feminism would die overnight as women tried their damnedest to compete for the relatively few men and men discovered a world of options.

The real winners here wouldn't be the returning soldiers though, it would probably be the guys too old to get drafted who woke up one morning in a poosy paradise.

There would be feminist holdouts that stupid or masochistic men would buy into but by and large it would be a repeat of what happened in the 1940s.

Post: #21

(08-11-2013 01:31 PM)MrXY Wrote:  

(08-11-2013 07:04 AM)Teedub Wrote:  If Feminism is so beneficial to the state, what will it take to defeat it?

The coming collapse of the welfare state will end feminism and a lot of other current cultural trends.Western societies will be very different in the aftermath

Life is gonna suck at that point, but most of the poisons that infect society will shrink or disappear altogether. Feminism, gay rights, frivolous law suits, eating disorders, entitlement programs. The "pussy bubble" will bust and bring it back down to normal levels. It'll happen in Greece, not enough time has passed since their economy went to the shitter.

Post: #22

From an ER healthcare standpoint, the end of the fat acceptance movement will help hospitals and patients who have serious emergencies.

As Tuth mentioned, there is a disproportionate number of fat patients who are poor and have no health insurance. Their complaints often vary-- joint pain, frequent upper respiratory infections, chronic fatigue-- most can be prevented by losing excess weight. My personal favorite, however, are those that come in with an episode of "chest discomfort" or "intermittent shortness of breath". The ER docs have to run a cardiac panel consisting of blood workup, EKG, and chest X-rays. Depending on what those results show, the doctor will run additional tests to rule out any of the serious complications from their symptoms (silent heart attacks, pulmonary embolisms). These tests are expensive, take up time, and the doctors are compensated less because the patient has no insurance or their insurance does not cover the necessary tests ( and Medicare looks to slash physician compensations further).

From my experience, more than half of these tests show negative workups. Most of these chest discomfort/"pain" complaints resolve themselves after an hour or two at the ER after IV fluid treatments and pampering by the nurses and docs (an extra pillow or a diet coke with ice is enough to make them happy), when they would have never arisen had the patient practiced healthy eating habits and exercised regularly. Yes, there are the cases where the patient has a congenital heart problem, messed up on their drug dosage, went on a cocaine binge and thus the problem is more serious...but often times, you'll see a 30 yr old female brought in by EMS because she walked too much and began experiencing palpitations, triggering a panic attack that gave her nausea and the entire system becomes a positive feedback loop.

Things get more complicated as fat patients get older--IV access becomes limited so you have to call a team to put in a PICC line, they're on too many medications so now doctors have to look at any contraindications, and of course--their fattitude only worsens with each ER trip. The time that is sadly misplaced to manage fat patients cuts into the time needed for patients with actual emergencies.

With the baby boomer population retiring, gov stepping in to reduce physician salaries, and the expected 90,000 physician shortage by 2020...the end of the fat acceptance movement will be huge (no pun intended).

For those interested--Why doctors are opting out of medicare: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...41898.html

Post: #23

(08-11-2013 02:22 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

(08-11-2013 01:31 PM)MrXY Wrote:  

(08-11-2013 07:04 AM)Teedub Wrote:  If Feminism is so beneficial to the state, what will it take to defeat it?

The coming collapse of the welfare state will end feminism and a lot of other current cultural trends.Western societies will be very different in the aftermath

Life is gonna suck at that point, but most of the poisons that infect society will shrink or disappear altogether. Feminism, gay rights, frivolous law suits, eating disorders, entitlement programs. The "pussy bubble" will bust and bring it back down to normal levels. It'll happen in Greece, not enough time has passed since their economy went to the shitter.

I doubt Greece had anything like the amount of stuff you mentioned even before the crisis there. It's very family orientated etc. Feminism doesn't thrive in societies like that, at least I think. Plus, it was never wealthy enough to have entitlement programs etc, at least not to Northern Euro standards. Heck, even the wealthiest nation on earth doesn't have welfare programs to the extent we in the North of Europe have. Although you do have more Affirmative Action kinda things, due to the amount of racial difference, or 'diversity', there.