Obesity

[SkaterTheDJWolf]

For those who miraculously don't know, obesity is the condition of being far, far too fat. I won't waste too much time on the details of the issue (I'll let you lazybottoms do the research yourselves or let the details  come out in the discussion) but I will provide some sources.

 

https://stateofobesity.org/rates/

 

http://www.who.int/topics/obesity/en/

 

So yeah, it's getting to be a bit of a problem. And the problem is in other nations as well.

 

Since I'm not very well educated on the issue, I'll let you debate the issue, with some points of contention:

 

What do you think is the cause of obesity?

 

What should be done to prevent it?

 

How can all levels of government, from the local town to the UN, help combat this problem/

 

Make up your own as the discussion progresses. OP that guides discussion least guides discussion best.

[mido9]

For those who miraculously don't know, obesity is the condition of being far, far too fat. I won't waste too much time on the details of the issue (I'll let you lazybottoms do the research yourselves or let the details  come out in the discussion) but I will provide some sources.

 

https://stateofobesity.org/rates/

 

http://www.who.int/topics/obesity/en/

 

So yeah, it's getting to be a bit of a problem. And the problem is in other nations as well.

 

Since I'm not very well educated on the issue, I'll let you debate the issue, with some points of contention:

 

What do you think is the cause of obesity?

 

What should be done to prevent it?

 

How can all levels of government, from the local town to the UN, help combat this problem/

 

Make up your own as the discussion progresses. OP that guides discussion least guides discussion best.

 

Eating terrible food all day, also (rarely) thyroid and etc problems

 

Have a balanced diet and such, exercise, even just not feeding your obesity makes it go from dangerous to just unsavory

 

Don't do anything. This isn't drugs or some big crime or something.

[SkaterTheDJWolf]

 

Eating terrible food all day, also (rarely) thyroid and etc problems

 

Have a balanced diet and such, exercise, even just not feeding your obesity makes it go from dangerous to just unsavory

 

Don't do anything. This isn't drugs or some big crime or something.

 

1. I was talking about the underlying political, social, and economic causes of such a massive gain in human weight like capitalism marketing food, the increased availability of technology, etc.

 

2. I was talking about the massive health issue it's become, with people raising Medicare costs because they're too lazy to learn self-control.

 

3. Yes, do something, this is a massive health issue that is killing people. But then again, discovering differing opinions are the fruits of discussion.

 

As for the rest of the discussion... I find it weird that we have simultaneous outbreaks of overeating and starvation. Does anyone else realize how far we've fallen?

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

1. Causes for obesity

 

Usually hereditary factors or people's lifestyle/food choices. 
 
For hereditary factors, certain ethnic groups are prone to being overweight / obese more than others (usually because of genetics, but there is some cultural things). From what I see in Hawai'i, Pacific Islanders do tend to be "large" for their respective heights.
 
Second one is the most common and usually up to an individual.
 
Basically, people just not getting the recommended amounts of exercise and/or eating junk food, high sodium foods on daily basis. I have a cousin who's roughly my height and over 240 lb because of eating junk food / instant ramen, etc. (not because of muscle mass) and lack of exercising.
 
There are the cases of people being morbidly obese (and upwards of 1,400 lb) due to hormonal problems (and a combination of overeating / sedentary lifestyles), but I'll leave this for another discussion, as those cases are rare.

 

You can find the list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_heaviest_people

====
 
2. Prevention

 

Really falls on the lifestyle choices for the most part. You can eat whatever you'd like, but do so in moderation and obviously get your required exercise (I think the recommendation is still 1 hr/day, but may vary). Also would help if you don't eat at McDonalds/Burger King (or whatever fast food place you have in your state/country) on a regular basis. Cutting down on sugary drinks and "empty" calories also helps. 
 
So really, limit intake of "empty" calories like soda, candy/sweets, etc and also that of high fat foods, while also getting exercise every day. 

 

====
 
3. Government regulation

 

There isn't much that can be done except trying to limit the amount of unhealthy foods available to consumers and well, encourage people to get their exercise and eat healthy. You literally cannot mandate that people exercise or not eat junk food, or they face arrest/fines/etc.

 

Even physicians cannot mandate that you stop eating unhealthy foods (well, cannot be Big Brother 24/7 on your choices and say "NO, you can't eat this"). However, know that continuing to be sedentary and eat unhealthy foods (in excess) usually results in increased heart attacks and health problems, plus earlier death.

[mido9]

1. I was talking about the underlying political, social, and economic causes of such a massive gain in human weight like capitalism marketing food, the increased availability of technology, etc.

 

2. I was talking about the massive health issue it's become, with people raising Medicare costs because they're too lazy to learn self-control.

 

3. Yes, do something, this is a massive health issue that is killing people. But then again, discovering differing opinions are the fruits of discussion.

 

As for the rest of the discussion... I find it weird that we have simultaneous outbreaks of overeating and starvation. Does anyone else realize how far we've fallen?

I mean, the government can't protect you from yourself and your own bad choices, especially when there isn't actually any bad/objectively bad at all times ever substance there.

 

Also it's really not that complicated, as countries get richer they are able to eat more difficult to find/make foods which are sometimes better, and you can't transfer that sort of economy because it takes decades to build up and goes away in a minute when mismanaged.

[Dad]

I mean, the government can't protect you from yourself and your own bad choices

 

What makes you say this?

[vla1ne]

What makes you say this?

not to speak for him, but people cannot, and should not be babied on the government's dollar. that's essentially making taxpayers pay for the personal choices of others. as far as obesity goes, what business does the government have in mandating dietary regimens and restricting foods? those are personal choices, and no government in the world should want to, or have to, look after every person in their respective country to see if they've been eating like a good boy. it is not only time consuming, it wastes money that could be spent bettering the status of the country in other ways. the freedom to make your own choices comes with being an adult, and as sad as it is, some adults will inevitably find ways to screw up somehow. 

[Spinny]

not to speak for him, but people cannot, and should not be babied on the government's dollar. that's essentially making taxpayers pay for the personal choices of others. as far as obesity goes, what business does the government have in mandating dietary regimens and restricting foods? those are personal choices, and no government in the world should want to, or have to, look after every person in their respective country to see if they've been eating like a good boy. it is not only time consuming, it wastes money that could be spent bettering the status of the country in other ways. the freedom to make your own choices comes with being an adult, and as sad as it is, some adults will inevitably find ways to screw up somehow. 

It is well within the interests of the government to make sure that the country is being "babied" to an extent and providing action against obesity rates. Health is a huge determining factor within the success of a country as shown by even a simple DTM model, if your country is healthy and it's inhabitants can live longer and work better hours, the GNI and tax toward the government increases. Whilst i understand that you might think that the government shouldn't be "babying" people, it really is in their best interest, especially given the fact that the UK pays money to people with health conditions and already babies people for making bad decisions in the first place.

This is why there is an increasing initiative within the media of the UK to stop the mass advertisation of junk food and unnecessary snacks, whilst the BBC article on Zoella and Archie felt as though it was reaching or grasping at straws, the crux of the matter stands; that is that people buy and want more junk food the more they are exposed to seeing it and tasting it due to how the food itself is designed to work. 

 

I mean, the government can't protect you from yourself and your own bad choices, especially when there isn't actually any bad/objectively bad at all times ever substance there.

 

Also it's really not that complicated, as countries get richer they are able to eat more difficult to find/make foods which are sometimes better, and you can't transfer that sort of economy because it takes decades to build up and goes away in a minute when mismanaged.

No but the government can put regulations in place that makes sure people are cared for in better ways. I have seen increasing amounts of scoliosis campaigning for children and such, which extends to obesity campaigns and things like that as well. Having increasingly tertiary and quaternary fields of employment discourages exercise and honestly some buildings dont even give the correct amounts of sunlight which is pretty horrifying for an office block. 

Back on subject. It has been suggested that the government puts regulations on where store owners and big franchises can put their sugary sweets so that people arent just tempted on the way to the till or checkout, buying more calories than necessary. Not that i think this will be too potent of a change; it's a difficult problem to solve but i dont believe that absolutely nothing can be done, even just added media attention and awareness campaigns would be a step in the right direction.

 

Also can i just say that you all treat this like "hurr durr these people are just making bad choices" when the reality is that alot of kids in the UK are raised on junk food and continue the lifestyle without knowing any better whatsoever due to the environment they're in, it's really disgusting to have you disregard this as some kind of "bad life choice" when some people are so far from getting the support they need in order to realize how to take care of themselves and be healthier for their own sake.

 

 

 

This is really ranty and probably not that good im sorry.

[vla1ne]

It is well within the interests of the government to make sure that the country is being "babied" to an extent and providing action against obesity rates. Health is a huge determining factor within the success of a country as shown by even a simple DTM model, if your country is healthy and it's inhabitants can live longer and work better hours, the GNI and tax toward the government increases. Whilst i understand that you might think that the government shouldn't be "babying" people, it really is in their best interest, especially given the fact that the UK pays money to people with health conditions and already babies people for making bad decisions in the first place.

This is why there is an increasing initiative within the media of the UK to stop the mass advertisation of junk food and unnecessary snacks, whilst the BBC article on Zoella and Archie felt as though it was reaching or grasping at straws, the crux of the matter stands; that is that people buy and want more junk food the more they are exposed to seeing it and tasting it due to how the food itself is designed to work. 

 

 

health is not a governmental problem, it is a personal problem. the government is not your mother. if you cannot manage your own health without the government stepping in, then the government is not going to be able to help you. and most, if not all attempts to do so, are merely a drain on money and effort that would be better spent on literally any other endeavor. no, the government babying you, is how you end up relying on the government. there is only one thing i support from the government in terms of support, and that's supporting personal responsibility. if you need the government to tell you what to eat, or how to live, then you have arguably given up your ability to govern your body to big brother. i can feel little but disgust for people who legitimately need the government to intervene in their dieting habits. 

 

advertising snacks is the responsibility of the companies making said snacks, the government should not be the one having any say in it. it's the people themselves who need to learn self control. and again, if the government is going to advocate anything about lifestyles, then it needs to be self control. not moderating for the people, but ensuring that the people are willing and able to moderate themselves. diets should not be held for a vote in congress, they should be designed and executed on your own will.

[VCR_CAT]

advertising snacks is the responsibility of the companies making said snacks, the government should not be the one having any say in it. it's the people themselves who need to learn self control. and again, if the government is going to advocate anything about lifestyles, then it needs to be self control. not moderating for the people, but ensuring that the people are willing and able to moderate themselves. diets should not be held for a vote in congress, they should be designed and executed on your own will.

 

Something tells me you've never done grocery shopping for yourself.

 

Long story short, it's pretty messed up how much cheaper and easier it is to get the foods that will destroy your body rather than eat an actually healthy diet.

 

I'm not saying the government needs to or should do anything, but I'm noticing that there's a degree of inadequate empathy in your argument. The government CAN do things to make these foods more easily acquired, such as promoting farms and local businesses so they don't have to charge through the roof, putting regulations on not only sold food (so it's not literal poison and, yes, companies will do that if they could get away with it; whatever makes it cheaper to make) but supplements as well.

 

It's actually a pretty simple law to pass to make dietary supplements and other products actually have to do the things they're advertising that they are supposed to do. The government doesn't need to actively put money or throw people at that problem, just pass a bill. I mean, they tried to at one point, but we all know how well that went when the corporations realized they would actually have to make their products do something or stop selling them.

 

 

Weight loss isn't easy. The government doesn't need to, or should, baby anyone to go through with it, but there are still things that can be done that aren't actively expensive that will benefit the health of the population as a whole. It's a hard process that takes a lot of time and effort, and the current food market and the big market of bogus diet pills and dangerous plans don't help in making it any easier. There's always something the government can do that isn't straight-up totalitarian and has positive changes and impacts on the country as a whole in areas beyond just the primary issue it's addressing (promoting local farms and businesses is going to go a longer way than simply the health of the population).

 

And of course the health of a country's population should be its concern; a healthy population is a working population is an economically positive population. You can't have a blue-collar working class when they're physically unfit to work at all, and the more prevalent the obesity problem becomes the smaller the population of workers who are physically fit to do physically demanding jobs become. And when that working population dwindles, it most definitely becomes the government's problem.

 

 

 

Ultimately, it's down to a person's own habits and lifestyle choices to take care of their bodies, and that's something better taught to kids by parents and/or schools than for the government to enforce. But there's definitely courses of action that can and probably should be taken to better promote the food market in a person's surrounding area.

[Sunshine Jesse]

What do you think is the cause of obesity?

A huge clusterfuck of societal and economic problems combined with a narrative of acceptance caused by a bunch of people who hate thinking about the role personal agency has in overcoming one's own problems.

 

What should be done to prevent it?

Education. Lessen the cost of healthy foods through any means necessary. Stop with the funking "it's okay to be fat lmao" narrative.

 

How can all levels of government, from the local town to the UN, help combat this problem/

 The above except with magic government money.

 

 

ezpz

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

As for the bit about government protecting people from themselves: a big problem is that, in the US at least, government subsidies in the grain industry actively hurt the health and wellness of the population. For decades, fats were demonized as government programs pushed hard and harder for a carbohydrate based diet, often suggesting that half or more of the calories we take in should be such.

 

I'm not saying unhealthy foods and diets should be outlawed, but by no means should they be encouraged.

[Simping For Hina]

Don't be fat. Be skinny.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

For something to think on.

 

I am 5'11" and, while I haven't checked weight recently, I am somewhere around 240 pounds. This, from what I checked, puts me right in the middle of the "Obese" category.

And yet my health is good and I am able to do hours of manual labor without any issues.

 

Basically I'm saying one problem with "obesity" is how vaguely defined it seems to be.

[SkaterTheDJWolf]

A huge clusterfuck of societal and economic problems combined with a narrative of acceptance caused by a bunch of people who hate thinking about the role personal agency has in overcoming one's own problems.

 

Education. Lessen the cost of healthy foods through any means necessary. Stop with the f***ing "it's okay to be fat lmao" narrative.

 

 The above except with magic government money.

 

 

1. https://www.reddit.com/r/fatlogic/

2. My thoughts exactly. Education and cheapening healthy food over 9000000000-kcal/gram junk is the key to fixing this. Knowledge is power (although if people are going to actively resist taking responsibility for their actions, fine. Let 'em die out so the rest of us can live and learn from them.) and money motivates.

3. Sadly, that magic government money also has to go other places. However, devoting some of our budget to obesity can fix things (although that would cut money from corporations who make money from bogus diets and junk food, and as mentioned before, money motivates...

 

 

One thing's for sure, though. Someone needs to help out in some way.

[mido9]

And of course the health of a country's population should be its concern; a healthy population is a working population is an economically positive population. You can't have a blue-collar working class when they're physically unfit to work at all, and the more prevalent the obesity problem becomes the smaller the population of workers who are physically fit to do physically demanding jobs become. And when that working population dwindles, it most definitely becomes the government's problem.

I think this is a very cynical way to look at it, other than how you're not meant to just shape huge parts of your country like that, if it got to the point where blue-collar workers are all obese, their wages would go up a ton and everyone would want to stop eating terribly just to get back in, it's not going to reach the point where nobody's working and everything collapses.

[VCR_CAT]

I think this is a very cynical way to look at it, other than how you're not meant to just shape huge parts of your country like that, if it got to the point where blue-collar workers are all obese, their wages would go up a ton and everyone would want to stop eating terribly just to get back in, it's not going to reach the point where nobody's working and everything collapses.

 

Health from food doesn't necessarily need to be obesity. There is still heart disease, cholesterol, and a whole myriad of issues that can arise from an unhealthy diet that can lead to someone being effectively unable to work for any sort of stretch of time. 

[vla1ne]

Something tells me you've never done grocery shopping for yourself.

 

Long story short, it's pretty messed up how much cheaper and easier it is to get the foods that will destroy your body rather than eat an actually healthy diet.

 

I'm not saying the government needs to or should do anything, but I'm noticing that there's a degree of inadequate empathy in your argument. The government CAN do things to make these foods more easily acquired, such as promoting farms and local businesses so they don't have to charge through the roof, putting regulations on not only sold food (so it's not literal poison and, yes, companies will do that if they could get away with it; whatever makes it cheaper to make) but supplements as well.

 

It's actually a pretty simple law to pass to make dietary supplements and other products actually have to do the things they're advertising that they are supposed to do. The government doesn't need to actively put money or throw people at that problem, just pass a bill. I mean, they tried to at one point, but we all know how well that went when the corporations realized they would actually have to make their products do something or stop selling them.

 

 

Weight loss isn't easy. The government doesn't need to, or should, baby anyone to go through with it, but there are still things that can be done that aren't actively expensive that will benefit the health of the population as a whole. It's a hard process that takes a lot of time and effort, and the current food market and the big market of bogus diet pills and dangerous plans don't help in making it any easier. There's always something the government can do that isn't straight-up totalitarian and has positive changes and impacts on the country as a whole in areas beyond just the primary issue it's addressing (promoting local farms and businesses is going to go a longer way than simply the health of the population).

 

And of course the health of a country's population should be its concern; a healthy population is a working population is an economically positive population. You can't have a blue-collar working class when they're physically unfit to work at all, and the more prevalent the obesity problem becomes the smaller the population of workers who are physically fit to do physically demanding jobs become. And when that working population dwindles, it most definitely becomes the government's problem.

 

 

 

Ultimately, it's down to a person's own habits and lifestyle choices to take care of their bodies, and that's something better taught to kids by parents and/or schools than for the government to enforce. But there's definitely courses of action that can and probably should be taken to better promote the food market in a person's surrounding area.

yes, i shop, and i know exactly how much cheaper it is to be a pig. i happen to be a pig most of the time (not to the point of being unhealthy, but after a long day's work, when oatmeal cookies are 99 cents, and a full and proper meal cost more in time and money, needless to say, i understand the sentiment well enough.)

 

allow me to cite a quote from my first comment: "as far as obesity goes, what business does the government have in mandating dietary regimens and restricting foods? those are personal choices, and no government in the world should want to, or have to, look after every person in their respective country to see if they've been eating like a good boy."

i can agree to an extent with incentives that align with the healthier choices, my comment was not (or at least shouldn't have been) directed towards gentle incentive to eat properly. my argument was focused more towards the ham-fisted way it has been handled in the past, by states like california and new york; https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303640104577438780692183556

i can reasonably see things like helping out orchards and the like to grow and distribute good food, as to lower the cost of eating healthy, but that was not what i meant. i assumed people were on the same page, but thought things like the above link were actually good ideas, which i was legitimately surprised, and somewhat disgusted at. there is a difference, between granting a helping hand to farmers, and babying the people by directing their dietary regimens.

 

 

a bill making products do as they advertise is not babying, it's something any honest company would actually be doing already. and is not a part of the scope of my argument.

 

 

"there is only one thing i support from the government in terms of support, and that's supporting personal responsibility. if you need the government to tell you what to eat, or how to live, then you have arguably given up your ability to govern your body to big brother." supporting farms, and helping ensure that the healthy option has enough backing to compete with the unhealthy option, definitely falls into the "personal responsibility" category. it is money spent somewhere that can use the aid, and it doesn't tell you what to eat, or restrict your options, it merely ensures that no matter your choice, you won't go broke for it. which falls under the umbrella of money better spent elsewhere. that position assists the market from all angles, ensuring that farms can compete without actively harming the sweets market, and it doesn't dictate your diets via legal force (which was what my claim was against). your retain the personal responsibility, but the choices are expanded, and you are not being told what to not do, so much as you are being told that you can now do this more, in addition to doing that, without taking as heavy a hit to your wallet. that is not governmental dictating, it is government actually opening paths, instead of closing them off. which is something i can applaud, but i would argue that government would, eventually find a way to mess that up too. that goes further into bureaucracy than i'd like to though, so i'll drop it for time's sake.

 

 

yes, the health of a country should be it's concern, sticking it's nose into the actual lives of the people, is not though. helping the healthy incentives compete, is not the same as telling people what to eat. and as far as a healthy working population goes, that's up to the people individually. if one person chooses to become unfit for work, then they have left the work force, and will likely need to either lose that weight, in order to regain a job, or find a job where rolling is a viable transport option. the need to work can help drive the need to be (at least moderately) fit. combined with the fact that being massively overweight, or having cheese clogged arteries, or getting diabetes, ect, simply doesn't feel good at all. if you asked around, i doubt you'd find more than a few people who would actually like to look anything like violet beauregarde. the government isn't there to make your choices for you, it's there to ensure that you can make your own. there is a distinction.