Is it fair to fine fat people for not dieting?

[Nowhere Man]

Unless your burn off what you eat, it doesn't really matter what you eat, but health food is always better for you, even if it means you're eating less for your Buck. Also I guess, don't eat eat eat health food. Eat little often, never fill up, always have 3 meals a day, no sweets, have a rest day for sweets and no exerise, if you fill up it's stomach stretching, if you decided to compensate by eating a butt load of food on a health food binge, do something else instead.

^^My point, you said that because you can make your own laws, only land owners get the vote, so I'm lead to believe that, if you're poor and living there with no assests or land to your name, maybe no job, that you're not going to get a vote, because you have no land. - It's a funky world we live in.

I think you read it wrong, Rutledge was against only land owners getting to vote, Franklin agreed with him. I would say that even convicts deserve the right to vote. Anyway, i'm getting off track. This is why I posted the quote because he was saying that a law like that would divide the population. I believe this law in Arizona does the same. There's no need to create two classes of people. The non "fat" people will begin thinking they are better that the "fat" people. I would be against that law and would urge my representative to fight it, but Arizona can make whatever law they want, it doesen't mean I have to like it.

 

[iguana_tonante]

iguana, it's hard to make the comparison because much of the cheap food available to the low income population here is processed and packaged to prolong shelf life, with most or all of the nutrients and fiber refined right out of it.

I've never lived in the US, but I find it almost unbelievable that you don't have open-air markets that sell groceries at a cheap price, or even a fresh vegetables section in your local supermarket.

When you're talking about people who depend on Medicaid, you can never edit economics out of the decisionmaking process. You might know that the pasta dish is better for you than the Big Mac and shake, but (1) good luck trying to find a restaurant to get such good pasta in low income neighborhoods, and (2) if the pasta dish (w/o drink) costs $9 and the Big Mac and shake cost $7, it's not going to matter so much which is healthier.

A home-cooked meal made of pasta/bread and vegetable can't be more than $5 for two people. Except if we are talking about homeless people who don't have access to cooking equipment, I don't see how McDonald's can be cheaper than home cooking your fresh stuff.

 

[JoeZhang]

A home-cooked meal made of pasta/bread and vegetable can't be more than $5 for two people.

you'd have to able to cook to do that - if you can cook, I think it's like reading, you can't understand how some people don't have any basic skills in that area. The idea of making a pasta sauce from scratch would stress out a lot of people I know - it's a bottled sauce full of sugar and crap or nothing.

 

[scotpens]

Yeah, I can't fathom how pasta and bread are considered fattening and unhealthy food in the US.

It's not the pasta; it's the creamy, cheesy, buttery sauces and other fattening crap we put on it. The same for potatoes.

And I thought the "low-carb" diet fad was already yesterday's news.

I've never lived in the US, but I find it almost unbelievable that you don't have open-air markets that sell groceries at a cheap price, or even a fresh vegetables section in your local supermarket.

Every American supermarket has a produce section. And we have outdoor farmers' markets; in fact, there's a famous one here in Los Angeles, near the CBS television studios. (Well, semi-outdoors; it has a roof.)

 

[iBender]

Running's usually free.

 

[An Officer]

I think we have to factor in levels of activity. Two individuals may be eating similarly poor diets, but one may be more physically active than the other. Big difference right there. The human body seems to prefer hard physical labour to office jobs and couch eating - funny that. You could probably get away with eating just about anything given a physically rigorous life. We are most of us very removed from a natural environment, unfortunately.

 

[bluedana]

I've never lived in the US, but I find it almost unbelievable that you don't have open-air markets that sell groceries at a cheap price, or even a fresh vegetables section in your local supermarket.

This is an example of the disconnect and assumptions which keep this problem in play. Why don't they just go to where the fresh veggies are? Perhaps because they are working all day. Or because it takes two or three city buses and a subway to get there -- which means the most they can get is the two bags they can carry. Or, as JoeZhang points out, nobody has taught them a healthy way to cook stuff. Or maybe they feel that it's better to buy a meal than to buy ingredients to a meal that you're still going to have to add stuff to.

It's just not helpful to pass a rule that says, Do X or we'll penalize you. You'd have to understand the social reasons why people aren't doing X in the first place.

Every American supermarket has a produce section. But not every American neighborhood has an accessible supermarket. And not every American has a car to get to one. But even the projects have the corner store with packaged, processed food, and probably a fast food joint of some sort right next to that.

No carb dieting is a fad. Low carb and carb counting are tools taught by the American Diabetes Association to control your glycemic index and help prevent or control Type II diabetes.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

I would agree with a requirement for subsidy recipients being required to attend a wholesome cooking/eating course before or soon after starting benefits. Perhaps they could also be offered one of those water filtration pitchers as an alternative to soda and those expensive (relative to tap water) individual serving bottled waters.

That might actually be a useful idea...allow food stamps to help pay for water filters and the like, so it actually becomes viable to have an alternative to soda. I know in areas like where I live, the tap water does not exactly taste like something that's healthy or good for you. And with the amount of chlorine, it probably isn't, unless you filter it.

 

[RobertVA]

Chlorine beats the live bacteria in the source for many municipal water systems. I don't recall the chemical name, but many water systems have switched to another disinfectant because of concerns about a chemical that's produced from the combination of chlorine and the remnants of plants (leaves etc) that are present in very dilute quantities in many surface water sources. I think as a bonus the substitute is less hazardous if it's accidentally spilled while being transported to the water treatment plant or waiting to be added to the water.

It's usually trace amounts of some mineral or a plant byproduct that gives the water from some municipal systems a slight disagreeable taste. The treatment plants are usually designed to remove solids through screening/filtering and settlement in a storage tank before adding a disinfecting chemical to make certain any bacteria in the water are killed. In many places filtering as effective as some consumers place on their kitchen faucet would make the water quantities many households use for bathing, laundry and toilets unaffordable.

 

[Miss Chicken]

I've never lived in the US, but I find it almost unbelievable that you don't have open-air markets that sell groceries at a cheap price, or even a fresh vegetables section in your local supermarket.

This is an example of the disconnect and assumptions which keep this problem in play. Why don't they just go to where the fresh veggies are? Perhaps because they are working all day. Or because it takes two or three city buses and a subway to get there -- which means the most they can get is the two bags they can carry. Or, as JoeZhang points out, nobody has taught them a healthy way to cook stuff. Or maybe they feel that it's better to buy a meal than to buy ingredients to a meal that you're still going to have to add stuff to.

Does anyone know what percentage of Americans do not easy access to vegetables. I can't imagine there is a single Australian city where it would take three bus-trips to get to a supermarket (and all Australian supermarkets have a fresh vegetable section).

And how hard is it to learn how to cook a handful of healthy meals Are there really Americans so stupid that they can't learn a few simple recipes from a book, a magazine or off the TV? The old lady who has a Depression Cooking channel on You Tube

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OPQqH3YlHA[/yt]

also has a book out which looks like it is quite easy to read.

 

[iguana_tonante]

A home-cooked meal made of pasta/bread and vegetable can't be more than $5 for two people.

you'd have to able to cook to do that - if you can cook, I think it's like reading, you can't understand how some people don't have any basic skills in that area. The idea of making a pasta sauce from scratch would stress out a lot of people I know - it's a bottled sauce full of sugar and crap or nothing.

You are right, I didn't even think that somebody could not be able to cook such a simple thing. On the other hand, it's not really rocket science, so I'm quite sure people can learn it with minimal effort, in a few days using a simple cookbook.

Why don't they just go to where the fresh veggies are? Perhaps because they are working all day. Or because it takes two or three city buses and a subway to get there -- which means the most they can get is the two bags they can carry. (...) Every American supermarket has a produce section. But not every American neighborhood has an accessible supermarket. And not every American has a car to get to one. But even the projects have the corner store with packaged, processed food, and probably a fast food joint of some sort right next to that.

It sounds like many American neighbourhoods need a better urban plan, which is the kind of governmental intervention that could be beneficial to the obesity problem, instead of instituting a "fat tax".

That might actually be a useful idea...allow food stamps to help pay for water filters and the like, so it actually becomes viable to have an alternative to soda. I know in areas like where I live, the tap water does not exactly taste like something that's healthy or good for you. And with the amount of chlorine, it probably isn't, unless you filter it.

The more I read, the more some places in the US sound like Third World's countries. Given your resources and power, it's baffling.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Chlorine beats the live bacteria in the source for many municipal water systems. I don't recall the chemical name, but many water systems have switched to another disinfectant because of concerns about a chemical that's produced from the combination of chlorine and the remnants of plants (leaves etc) that are present in very dilute quantities in many surface water sources. I think as a bonus the substitute is less hazardous if it's accidentally spilled while being transported to the water treatment plant or waiting to be added to the water.

It's usually trace amounts of some mineral or a plant byproduct that gives the water from some municipal systems a slight disagreeable taste. The treatment plants are usually designed to remove solids through screening/filtering and settlement in a storage tank before adding a disinfecting chemical to make certain any bacteria in the water are killed. In many places filtering as effective as some consumers place on their kitchen faucet would make the water quantities many households use for bathing, laundry and toilets unaffordable.

I read this when I was little...I know how the waterworks works. I think I still have that book.

But I think that if it's not affordable to have water that isn't full of chemicals (and ours is BAD), then it would help if those faucet filters were OK to buy on food stamps, to discourage soda drinking. Nobody in their right mind around here would drink straight out of the tap.

 

[farmkid]

I read this when I was little...I know how the waterworks works. I think I still have that book.

But I think that if it's not affordable to have water that isn't full of chemicals (and ours is BAD), then it would help if those faucet filters were OK to buy on food stamps, to discourage soda drinking. Nobody in their right mind around here would drink straight out of the tap.

If it's not safe to drink, it's not legally allowed to come out of the tap. In fact, study after study has shown that in general tap water is cleaner and safer than bottled water. Go ahead and drink it, even without a filter. You'll be just fine. (As long as you're in the US, that is. I don't know about other countries.)

 

[bluedana]

I've never lived in the US, but I find it almost unbelievable that you don't have open-air markets that sell groceries at a cheap price, or even a fresh vegetables section in your local supermarket.

This is an example of the disconnect and assumptions which keep this problem in play. Why don't they just go to where the fresh veggies are? Perhaps because they are working all day. Or because it takes two or three city buses and a subway to get there -- which means the most they can get is the two bags they can carry. Or, as JoeZhang points out, nobody has taught them a healthy way to cook stuff. Or maybe they feel that it's better to buy a meal than to buy ingredients to a meal that you're still going to have to add stuff to.

Does anyone know what percentage of Americans do not easy access to vegetables. I can't imagine there is a single Australian city where it would take three bus-trips to get to a supermarket (and all Australian supermarkets have a fresh vegetable section).

Start here.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1900947,00.html

or here.

http://news.change.org/stories/food-deserts-access-in-america

or here.

http://www.good.is/post/food-desert...laces-in-america-farthest-from-a-supermarket/

 

[Miss Chicken]

Thanks for the info. I think that something needs to be done about access to healthy food in the USA. There is no good reason for these food deserts to exist.

However I do not agree with one statement

Even a mile is far to walk, both ways, for food, if you think about it.

A mile is no real distance to walk at all unless you are seriously disabled or elderly or you have several small children. One can transport quite a lot of groceries is one of those two wheeled canvas shopping buggies that you can pull along behind you.

 

[RobertVA]

In many areas Americans are more of a car culture than other parts of the world. It's common for all but smallish convenience stores to be excluded from residential areas built in the last half century (too much noise associated with deliveries combined with customer auto traffic) . Even the convenience stores are often limited to the neighborhood entrance along the through arteries. Neighborhoods are often designed with one or two entrances on the same side of the neighborhood to discourage vehicles driving through the neighborhood in large numbers or at high speed.

Convenience stores, often featuring gasoline pumps, don't usually stock much in the way of fresh meat, produce or bulk (multiple pound) packages of staples like rice and dried beans. Much of their revenue comes from nutritionally challenged products like beer, carbonated beverages and snack foods like beef jerky and chips (some call them crisps). The display space in the convenience store is allocated to reflect what products they are successful in selling. The fuel acts to attract customers who might decide to buy a cup coffee for the trip to work or replenish the household milk supply on the way home.

The better stocked "Supermarkets" featuring things like produce, rice and fresh meats are scattered a bit thinner. They are usually in a more substantial "strip mall" with smaller retailers like beauty salons and independent restaurants hoping to snag a little trade from people on the way from their car to the supermarket (no concern about perishables spoiling in the car at that time). The people that design strip malls are usually much more concerned about the convenience of customers that have already driven to their parking lot than customers that walk there from off site. Even if the local government was thoughtful enough to install sidewalks along the busy traffic arteries adjacent to the strip mall, a pedestrian entering the facility commonly faces the choice of walking through landscaping (lawns or even a hedge) or with auto traffic in the busy driveway between the public road and the broad parking lot.

 

[Miss Chicken]

It is a pity that much of surburbia in the US isn't better designed.

When I walk down to the shopping centre there are good footpaths to use and a zebra crossing through the car park from the footpath to the shopping centre. The bus actually stops very close to the shopping centre (one has about a 50 metre walk). This centre only has one supermarket and a few specialists stores (pharmacy, games shop, video store, newsagency etc)

A bus trip away from me is Tasmania's largest shopping centre. It is quite small by world standards but it does me. The bus mall is located directly outside the shopping centre regular cars are not allowed to use the bus mall. There are zebra crossings in the carpark. There are two supermarket in this shopping centre. It also has a Kmart and a Big W and many smaller specialist stores.

Nowadays I have my groceries delivered after ordering them online. It only costs me $5 to have them delivered if I choose a 4 hour window. Yesterday I had a four hour window (9am-1pm) and the groceries arrived before 10am. The vegetables that I ordered were crisp and well chosen by to 'store shopper'.

 

[farmkid]

A lot of you are throwing around reasons that take responsibility away from the person--"the grocery store is too far away", "they don't have a car and can't get any decent food", "they don't know how to eat anything but crap", etc. That may be true for some people, but I've never known anyone like that and I've known plenty of obese people. So there may be people with those challenges, but they are certainly the minority. If those are the real reason, or even major contributing factors, there should be a much higher rate of obesity among people who fit those descriptions. Where are those data?

I just don't believe the reasons you all are giving are a factor in any but a small minority of cases. I also don't believe food is the major issue. 50 years ago people ate worse than we do now and there were a lot fewer obese people. We eat a lot more sugar now, but less fat. The main thing, however, is that we're not nearly as active as we used to be. Parents are scared to let their children play unsupervised, so now kids don't roam around doing all the active stuff they used to. They only play with friends when their parents get together and arrange a play date. They only play outside when their parents take them to the park. That doesn't happen often because both parents are working and don't have the time. Their yards are too small to play any real games, so they sit inside and play video games and watch TV. Adults work all day in an office then go home and sit in front of the TV or computer all evening. They might go to the gym a couple hours a week, but that pales in comparison to doing actual physical work. Food is a factor, but I believe changes in activity levels are a much larger factor.

 

[Jetfire]

Consuming less sugar is key...being more active is next on the list. It really is about shifting priorities...not all obese people are poor...I have seen plenty of people who can afford to eat healthier and actually have access to a gym and are still over weight...it is mostly out of habit.

[edit] I do not however think it is fair to fine people for being obese...that is just stupid.

 

[T'Bonz]

Nowadays I have my groceries delivered after ordering them online. It only costs me $5 to have them delivered if I choose a 4 hour window.

I'm so jealous. I wish I could have groceries delivered.

*

iguana_tonante:

It sounds like many American neighbourhoods need a better urban plan, which is the kind of governmental intervention that could be beneficial to the obesity problem, instead of instituting a "fat tax."

They do, as do the suburbs. In many parts of a city, there is no easy access to NUTRITIOUS food, just junk. I contrast that to say, Paris, where just blocks from Notre Dame, they had a fresh market twice a week. VERY convenient for city dwellers. Hell, I was only there for part of the week and I used that market myself to purchase fresh fruit for breakfast to have along with my coffee.

The problem in our suburbs more often than not is a lack of sidewalks. You risk life and limb walking or bicycling in some places. And distances are further, unlike in compact cities, so suburbanites as a result of these factors, walk less.

*

Given that the medical profession is ABSOLUTELY FUCKING USELESS when it comes to helping patients with weight loss, they have a lot of nerve taking part in any scheme to fine people who can't lose.

You guys don't know, but I decided I was tired of being overweight. I lost 20-odd pounds effortless, by junking my old bad eating habits and switching junk for fruit and veggies and real food (and portion control and all of that). And yes, I even exercise, 5-6x a week. It worked great until March, when *WHAM!* I went into full plateau and stayed there. So today I ask my doc what I should do and I get the vague, "Eat less."

You silly bitch, if I eat less now, I'll go into "starvation mode" and my metabolism will slow more. I upped the exercise and that didn't work. I don't EAT junk...I can't tell you the last time I had something naughty. I eat healthy now and surprisingly, I don't mind doing so. I eat much less too, as portion control is important.

The plateau is very frustrating especially when I'm highly motivated to get the last bit off. They never have any solutions other than "eat less or work out more" and after a point, that stops working.

So they can take their lectures and their fines and shove it up their asses.