I am so tired of the fat acceptance movement and people trying to force the world to accommodate people that have no discipline and have lost control.

[lurchadams]

If Trump wants to be a lard ass that is his choice. The man can well afford to pay for his dietary choices with his own money.... or any consequences from his choices. As long as he or anyone else isn't buying their crap food with tax dollars, I don't care.

And BTW, I guess you forgot what fat a ass Bill Clinton used to be when he was a junk food junkie. Healthiest president in my lifetime has been G.W Bush. Trump ain't exactly William Taft yet, and of course Obama was a smoker too.... so great example there, right?

Obama didn't smoke in public. As president, Obama and W. thought it was important to lead by example. All trump cares about is pandering to his knuckle-dragging base who love it when their leaders give the middle finger to healthy choices and proper conduct.

And W. was he healthiest president you say? You sure all the coke and alcohol was out of his system?

 

[dex4974]

Perhaps the above is an illustration why culture sees a need to show acceptance towards the obese as human beings who are no less deserving of love than you. Love and acceptance are effective motivators to get healthy. Shame, elitism, and disgust are not effective motivators, and are much more destructive to the health of society as a whole than fat people.

Your prejudice and intolerance is far more destructive to your culture than any fat person is. By your own estimation of what is good for society, perhaps it is you that should be shamed and ostracized for your attitude towards your fellow human beings?

As you wish.

 

[dex4974]

Obama didn't smoke in public. As president, Obama and W. thought it was important to lead by example. All trump cares about is pandering to his knuckle-dragging base who love it when their leaders give the middle finger to healthy choices and proper conduct.

And W. was he healthiest president you say? You sure all the coke and alcohol was out of his system?

Carter is a dinosaur. Still hanging in there.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I consider it sufficient that we make sure the government's official position--in all literature and guidelines--is that obesity is unhealthy, unattractive, burdensome to society, and a generally undesirable state of being, similar to drug addiction, smoking, or poor hygiene. It may be tolerable, but it isn't beautiful or commendable.

Yes, this is a judgmental position, but the official position should be judgmental. It should be as blunt and insensitive as a kick to the face.

The sensitivity, encouragement, support, and--yes--pressure, to get people to take weight loss seriously, to not to accept obesity as natural or beautiful, comes from individuals and communities.

The idea that it should be illegal for medical care insurance premiums and/or deductibles to be adjusted for actuarial risk factors (aka pre-existing conditions) is part of the problem.

Why, exactly, does it make sense to allow medical care insurance premiums to be tripled based on one’s age, yet not increased (at all) based on one’s obesity?

 

[dex4974]

The idea that it should be illegal for medical care insurance premiums and/or deductibles to be adjusted for actuarial risk factors (aka pre-existing conditions) is part of the problem.

Why, exactly, does it make sense to allow medical care insurance premiums to be tripled based on one’s age, yet not increased (at all) based on one’s obesity?

Because feelings.

 

[ttwtt78640]

When my weight rose to 191 lb, the only reason I fought it back down to 173 was because my grandparents' eyes bugged out of their heads when I told them I'd let myself go to 191.

I suppose they weren't "judgmental or harsh" in the sense of calling me "fattie", etc., but it was clear they were amazed and disappointed I'd let myself go, and that was the key motivation behind my losing 18 pounds.

Hence I'm living proof that while "pressure" may not always work, it can work and may be the only thing that works.

Using only height/weight (BMI?) to determine whether one is overweight would make many athletes appear to be overweight.

 

[lurchadams]

Carter is a dinosaur. Still hanging in there.

Yep, he's had a few health scares.

 

[Novichok]

Any ideas?

I read the whole thread and progressively felt more and more sorry for you.

As you posted, life is simple: Eat less, burn more, create a calorie deficit and the weight is going down. It's really that simple and that is why the fatsos hate this message - because it's THAT simple. They like complicated to bs why they are fat. Somebody should post that list.

Calorie deficits are a bi***. No, it's not easy. Easy is in reverse. At the end of easy are Darwin, the virus, and the mortality statistics.

 

[Court Jester]

Obama didn't smoke in public.

What does that mean?
Clinton didn't bang 22 year old white house interns in public either.
JFK didn't screw multiple other women in public.
LBJ didn't use the n-word in public (probably Nixon either)
Rosilynn Carter didn't drink shoe polish in public.

But they all did

As president, Obama and W. thought it was important to lead by example.

Oh! Now you all love W don't you? But when he was President he was the devil. LOL

All trump cares about is pandering to his knuckle-dragging base who love it when their leaders give the middle finger to healthy choices and proper conduct.

Sure! "healthy choices" on the left like sodomite love. Haha, you're funny.

And when it comes to "knuckles"----at least Republicans knuckles get scuffed walking upright, you lefties are still up in the trees peeling bananas with you feet.

And W. was he healthiest president you say? You sure all the coke and alcohol was out of his system?

Not while he was President, not even when he was Governor. W was so active that the Secret Service officers in his detail claimed they too on average lost 20-30lbs each trying to keep up with him.

 

[COTO]

Why, exactly, does it make sense to allow medical care insurance premiums to be tripled based on one’s age, yet not increased (at all) based on one’s obesity?

I don't know if it makes sense necessarily, but the obvious reason for the distinction is because everybody gets old while not everybody becomes obese.

 

[COTO]

Using only height/weight (BMI?) to determine whether one is overweight would make many athletes appear to be overweight.

Indeed.

However, I was pretty chunky at 191. It definitely wasn't a fit, muscular 191. I'm glad I took the weight off.

 

[vegas giants]

In what ways are you changing society?

None. Fair enough. But at least I try to present a real life solution to a real life problem

 

[ttwtt78640]

Indeed.

However, I was pretty chunky at 191. It definitely wasn't a fit, muscular 191. I'm glad I took the weight off.

My point was that a person of your same height could be either at a weight of 191. I asked my nurse why she takes my blood pressure on every (monthly) visit, yet rarely checks my weight - her reply was that she could see my weight gain/loss but not changes in my blood pressure.

 

[Novichok]

I don't know if it makes sense necessarily, but the obvious reason for the distinction is because everybody gets old while not everybody becomes obese.

"Becomes" looks like the wrong word but I have no idea what to use to describe the process. Maybe "growing".
Growing fat is like growing anything or getting a worthless college degree in black or women studied - it takes effort and money, but you get nothing in return except a pile of fat and debt.

 

[Court Jester]

The idea that it should be illegal for medical care insurance premiums and/or deductibles to be adjusted for actuarial risk factors (aka pre-existing conditions) is part of the problem.

You make a good point, but I think on some of that the idea is similar to why we require handicapped access; as a society we recognize that there are people born with or who develop unforeseen health problems which may not be avoidable, so we accept some shared burden for people like that.

But solving the issue in healthcare insurance for pre-existng conditions would have been easily solved by requiring all insurers to cover pre existing conditions by leveling the playing field. Insurance companies don't care about covering the conditions, as long as their competitors have to as well; then they all just adjust their actuary tables accordingly.

Years ago when I had an option at work to choose between a HMO or PPO plan, all of the HMO plans covered pre-existing conditions on day one. The PPO plans would cover them too, but with the single exception that services paid out for a pre-existing condition would be excluded for a period of ONE YEAR, and then after that, covered same as all other coverage. Businesses need to cover costs and be competative in order to offer the best rates and still make a profit. We didn't need the ACA to regulate for that result.

Its like seatbelts in cars. Initiallly many auto manufacturers only offered them at additional cost or not at all due to their profits. When they were mandated by law then they all had them and whatever cost that was not a disadvantage to just one company.

Why, exactly, does it make sense to allow medical care insurance premiums to be tripled based on one’s age, yet not increased (at all) based on one’s obesity?

Now this is something I do agree with, same way rates are jacked up for smokers. If it can be shown that the obesity is a result of wilful lifestyle choices then sure, raise their rates. And the argument for that is simple: Even with single payer socialized medicine as seen in many European nations; they eventually get to a point where they deny service to---or delay care in order to reprioritise availabe healthcare resources away from people who choose to live unhealthy lifestyles, and direct them to the people who do. So at least in a market driven insurance model, you don't have to deny services, just make people pay for them at a rate which reflect how they consume the services.

If people choose to drive a Ferrarri they will pay higher auto insurance rates than if they choose to drive a Prius.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You make a good point, but I think on some of that the idea is similar to why we require handicapped access; as a society we recognize that there are people born with or who develop unforeseen health problems which may not be avoidable, so we accept some shared burden for people like that.

But solving the issue in healthcare insurance for pre-existng conditions would have been easily solved by requiring all insurers to cover pre existing conditions by leveling the playing field. Insurance companies don't care about covering the conditions, as long as their competitors have to as well; then they all just adjust their actuary tables accordingly.

Years ago when I had an option at work to choose between a HMO or PPO plan, all of the HMO plans covered pre-existing conditions on day one. The PPO plans would cover them too, but with the single exception that services paid out for a pre-existing condition would be excluded for a period of ONE YEAR, and then after that, covered same as all other coverage. Businesses need to cover costs and be competative in order to offer the best rates and still make a profit. We didn't need the ACA to regulate for that result.

Its like seatbelts in cars. Initiallly many auto manufacturers only offered them at additional cost or not at all due to their profits. When they were mandated by law then they all had them and whatever cost that was not a disadvantage to just one company.




Now this is something I do agree with, same way rates are jacked up for smokers. If it can be shown that the obesity is a result of wilful lifestyle choices then sure, raise their rates. And the argument for that is simple: Even with single payer socialized medicine as seen in many European nations; they eventually get to a point where they deny service to---or delay care in order to reprioritise availabe healthcare resources away from people who choose to live unhealthy lifestyles, and direct them to the people who do. So at least in a market driven insurance model, you don't have to deny services, just make people pay for them at a rate which reflect how they consume the services.

If people choose to drive a Ferrarri they will pay higher auto insurance rates than if they choose to drive a Prius.

Folks do not choose to get older and no diet or exercise routine will change their age.

 

[Mr Person]

I've never heard Trump championing fat acceptance.

 

[justabubba]

Measuring calories is not the only thing you should focus on when losing weight because the type of calories you eat are important if you want to optimize your health while losing weight. That does not mean you shouldn't pay attention to your calorie intake.

Let me shout it from the rooftops one more time.

It is impossible, I repeat, impossible to lose weight without a calorie deficit. The amount of calories you consume and from where is a relevant part of your weight loss plan. That video discourages people from obsessing about calories and focusing too much on them. That does not mean your calorie intake is not important. That video seems to have done an excellent job of confusing several of you about the role of calories.

much more complicated that you are making it out to be
the video recommended to you would fill in a lot of the information you are missing
unfortunately, you seem opposed to learning some things that you don't already know about this topic
when calories are reduced from one's diet the body responds with an equitable reduction in the calories consumed to continue basic body functions
what one eats and when they eat it affect the body's hormonal system, which creates or eliminates food craving
before the move towards obesity by 1/3 of the population and being overweight by another third, our eating habits were different. we ate three meals a day and tended not to eat snacks throughout our waking hours. and our population generally consisted of people of normal weight
since the late 50's and the increase in cardiac incidents, government has been (unintentionally) sharing unsound dietary advice, while the public has been following said misinformation (avoid fats, move to carbs)
so, while the appropriate approach to healthy eating is not all that complicated, it is not as simple as you pretend to present it to be

 

[dex4974]

much more complicated that you are making it out to be

What I said is a fact.

 

[justabubba]

Measuring calories is not the only thing you should focus on when losing weight because the type of calories you eat are important if you want to optimize your health while losing weight. That does not mean you shouldn't pay attention to your calorie intake.

Let me shout it from the rooftops one more time.

It is impossible, I repeat, impossible to lose weight without a calorie deficit. The amount of calories you consume and from where is a relevant part of your weight loss plan. That video discourages people from obsessing about calories and focusing too much on them. That does not mean your calorie intake is not important. That video seems to have done an excellent job of confusing several of you about the role of calories.

Can I lose weight without exercise, through diet alone?

Dieting alone can lead to weight loss, though it is not feasible for most people and will not produce long term results. Dieting without exercise leads to yo-yo style weight fluctuations with a steady increase in weight over time. A moderate restriction in calorie intake combined with an...

straighthealth.com

.



Sorry but please pay special attention to the underlined parts. I want to reiterate that I didn't say it's not better to eat healthy and be healthier. I didn't say calories are the only thing that matters. I said they do matter though, because weight loss is impossible without a calorie deficit. Anybody arguing with me about this simply doesn't understand what they are talking about.

What I said is a fact.

it's an incomplete approach
an ignorant one

 

[dex4974]

it's an incomplete approach
an ignorant one

I didn't say it's the only thing one should focus on. I only said it's good to be aware of it.

 

[Middleground]

Diet Coke doesn’t, in itself, make anyone fat. It’s the triple bacon cheeseburger that came with it that does. Honestly, MG, It is still generally true that weight gain happens when we consume more calories than we burn and weight loss is the reverse. I’m sure there are exceptions to that, but not enough to swallow the rule. That’s why weight loss surgery is about reducing the size of the stomach so someone physically can’t take in more calories.

Yes, X-factor, Diet Coke does indeed make you fat. It spikes insulin. Insulin makes you fat.

 

[Middleground]

Diet Coke doesn’t, in itself, make anyone fat. It’s the triple bacon cheeseburger that came with it that does. Honestly, MG, It is still generally true that weight gain happens when we consume more calories than we burn and weight loss is the reverse. I’m sure there are exceptions to that, but not enough to swallow the rule. That’s why weight loss surgery is about reducing the size of the stomach so someone physically can’t take in more calories.

Yet isn't it interesting that only 5% manage to keep it off. Why is that, X????

 

[Middleground]

much more complicated that you are making it out to be
the video recommended to you would fill in a lot of the information you are missing
unfortunately, you seem opposed to learning some things that you don't already know about this topic
when calories are reduced from one's diet the body responds with an equitable reduction in the calories consumed to continue basic body functions
what one eats and when they eat it affect the body's hormonal system, which creates or eliminates food craving
before the move towards obesity by 1/3 of the population and being overweight by another third, our eating habits were different. we ate three meals a day and tended not to eat snacks throughout our waking hours. and our population generally consisted of people of normal weight
since the late 50's and the increase in cardiac incidents, government has been (unintentionally) sharing unsound dietary advice, while the public has been following said misinformation (avoid fats, move to carbs)
so, while the appropriate approach to healthy eating is not all that complicated, it is not as simple as you pretend to present it to be

Yay... someone gets it. Thank you.

 

[dex4974]

Yay... someone gets it. Thank you.

I have understood everything you've been saying the entire time.