PDA

View Full Version : "Waist" in the NHS



Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 16:30
Here is a link to a news article about new ambulances for fat people. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880

What do people think? Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand? How much more neglect of personal responsibility for peoples own health do we need to see?

This is purely a discussion on obesity no comments about smoking, drug abuse, suicide etc which may be considered neglect of ones health.

ShelleyCowie
04-Feb-11, 17:00
Here is a link to a news article about new ambulances for fat people. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880

What do people think? Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand? How much more neglect of personal responsibility for peoples own health do we need to see?

This is purely a discussion on obesity no comments about smoking, drug abuse, suicide etc which may be considered neglect of ones health.

For your first post thats just a bit harsh to start off with? Have you got something against obese people?

If this is what is required for the paramdeics to carry out their jobs then the equipment is necessary! Would you rather they said "oh this one is a bit on the fat side, just leave him"

Obesity is becoming more common within younger people too. And we cant just say parents are over feeding and they are so lazy that they wont do anything. Alot of kids eat for comfort, whether its because they are getting bullied at school or have problems at home, even confidence issues.

Obesity is a very large (no pun intended) subject. So many sides, so many arguments. No im not obese either by the way, bit on the "flumpy" side since having my last son but i exercise regularly and know the weight will come off soon :) Being a size 12 for a few more months aint the end of the world!!

Kodiak
04-Feb-11, 17:04
Stand against What? Are you suggesting that anyone overweight should not get medical treatment? I hope not.

It makes no difference what weight a person is, they are still a person and as such they should be treated with as much dignity as any other person.

annemarie482
04-Feb-11, 17:06
are you suggesting we take a stand by folding our arms and saying to the "fat" person "your too big for the van, hope you'll survive" and drive off?

im sure like most things there are ways and means.
don't think an instant total replacement with "fat ambulances" is quite the answer but ergonomically sensible for the future,
if the human race is getting larger, the equipment should be made to fit the purpose.

not doing so, will not stop the "fat" people getting "fat"
will just mean they don't get the same treatment or aides that the average joe bloggs get.

obesity is a growing problem (excuse the pun) that will not be addressed through shunning.

shazzap
04-Feb-11, 17:15
I used to be a size 10 - 12 . Had been all my life, up to having illness and disability.
I am now a size 14, through not being able to exercise.
I hope i don't put on more weight. But my point being is a lot of people are obese through no fault of their own.
It's about time Ambulances were updated, as after having to travel in one everyday, for 36 days. Whilst having radiotherapy, with a leg 4 times the size of the other and a muscle transplant. I can say that they were not made with comfort in mind for the patient. Any upgrades will be appreciated by those who have the misfortune to ever have to travel in one of these.

Walter Ego
04-Feb-11, 17:36
It's self-induced.

Tell 'em to phone back when they've got their pie intake down to a sensible level.

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 17:38
For your first post thats just a bit harsh to start off with? Have you got something against obese people?

Sorry, I didn't intend for the rhetoric I used to come across as being quite so harsh, I wasn't attacking anyone, but I do feel that it's an important topic that should be discussed, because, as you've all admitted, the prevalence of obesity is rising in British society.


Stand against What? Are you suggesting that anyone overweight should not get medical treatment? I hope not.

I wasn't suggesting anything, simply asking what the rest of you think about the issue of rationing money for different aspects of healthcare, which is an inevitability in any publicly funded health service, in the specific context of morbid obesity.


if the human race is getting larger, the equipment should be made to fit the purpose.

not doing so, will not stop the "fat" people getting "fat"

I would argue that it is not an unavoidable anthropological certainty that people will get larger, but rather a facet of the current consumerist culture that we live in, which eschews personal responsibility in favour of an expectation that the state will find a solution to your problems for you.


But my point being is a lot of people are obese through no fault of their own.

I'm sorry to hear about your leg, but what you've said is simply not true, while a slim fraction (ignore the pun), may be obese because of medical illness, the overwhelming majority of overweight people are heavy simply because they have not worked out the basic equation, which is that if 'calories in' exceeds 'calories out' weight increases. And it should be noted that more people become disabled through obesity than obese through disability.

For what it's worth I believe entirely in the principles and ideals of the NHS, but we do need a genuine discussion in this country about whether or not we can afford to continue paying for services which only accommodate those people unwilling to take responsibility for their own weight, and thus health.

bekisman
04-Feb-11, 17:39
Here is a link to a news article about new ambulances for fat people. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880

What do people think? Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand? How much more neglect of personal responsibility for peoples own health do we need to see?

This is purely a discussion on obesity no comments about smoking, drug abuse, suicide etc which may be considered neglect of ones health.

"How much more neglect of personal responsibility for peoples own health do we need to see?" you then continue to say not to talk about what might be considered neglect of one's health with reference to drugs, smoking etc.... Seems a very narrow viewpoint, denigrating just obese people (who as can be seen above, are in this situation through no fault of their own) and leaving out diseases - for example - from smoking - is there a 'smoking disease' as with Bulimia Nervosa, Anorexia Nervosa, or Prader-Willi Syndrome?
I have a sneaking suspicion this new member, may well not be new after all..

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 17:44
I only suggested limiting the discussion to obesity, as it's a very current issue, and because a wider discussion on all topics that effect resources in the NHS would probably be too unwieldy for a single thread, not to specifically attack anyone one group of people.

No I'm not a reformed member, but I have read Caithness.org, with intrest, for a while now.

Gronnuck
04-Feb-11, 17:56
Here is a link to a news article about new ambulances for fat people http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880) I’m old enough to remember when ambulances were nothing more than a van with space for a stretcher or two and the ethos was ‘scoop and scoot’. The Ambulance Service and its equipment has evolved and will continue to evolve to meet the needs of the whole community.


What do people think? Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand? How much more neglect of personal responsibility for peoples own health do we need to see?That has to be one of the most unpleasant statements I’ve come across. You must be some kind of health fascist to say something about people you know nothing about.


This is purely a discussion on obesity no comments about smoking, drug abuse, suicide etc which may be considered neglect of ones health.There are a myriad of ways people could be accused of neglecting their health. Even people who climb mountains and sail oceans occasionally need help/rescue. But you choose to focus exclusively people who are obese. Which leads me to believe you are a narrow minded bigot.

sandyr1
04-Feb-11, 18:00
People with disablities need not be overweight.
Even those with severe problems can control weight.....not too difficult to figure.

shazzap
04-Feb-11, 18:03
I'm sorry to hear about your leg, but what you've said is simply not true, while a slim fraction (ignore the pun), may be obese because of medical illness, the overwhelming majority of overweight people are heavy simply because they have not worked out the basic equation, which is that if 'calories in' exceeds 'calories out' weight increases. And it should be noted that more people become disabled through obesity than obese through disability.

For what it's worth I believe entirely in the principles and ideals of the NHS, but we do need a genuine discussion in this country about whether or not we can afford to continue paying for services which only accommodate those people unwilling to take responsibility for their own weight, and thus health.

My statement is true.
I did not say that everyone was obese because of illness or disability. I said a lot of people.

Also i was not looking for sympathy, but, Was trying to get across how uncomfortable Ambulances are, and any improvement must help for the service user. The new equipment ( lifting apparatus ) will make it better for the Ambulance crew. immaterial of whether the Service user is, large, small, fat or thin.

shazzap
04-Feb-11, 18:04
People with disablities need not be overweight.
Even those with severe problems can control weight.....not too difficult to figure.


I beg to differ.
Thyroid being one.
Couple that with a physical disability.

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 18:06
I’m old enough to remember when ambulances were nothing more than a van with space for a stretcher or two and the ethos was ‘scoop and scoot’. The Ambulance Service and its equipment has evolved and will continue to evolve to meet the needs of the whole community.

That has to be one of the most unpleasant statements I’ve come across. You must be some kind of health fascist to say something about people you know nothing about.

There are a myriad of ways people could be accused of neglecting their health. Even people who climb mountains and sail oceans occasionally need help/rescue. But you choose to focus exclusively people who are obese. Which leads me to believe you are a narrow minded bigot.

You've completely misunderstood my intent, I'm not attacking obese people, nor am I suggesting that they are the only group of people who are neglecting their health, and I resent being called a fascist and a bigot. I was asking whether or not you thought that this was the best use of money in the NHS, and whether, in a more general sense if you're concerned with the extent to which services are provided exclusively for fat people.

I wonder if you'll find this article interesting: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1353603/Obese-Kiira-Delaney-loses-17-stone-2-years-GP-says-gastric-band.html

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 18:12
My statement is true.
I did not say that everyone was obese because of illness or disability. I said a lot of people.

And I am telling you that it is categorically not 'a lot' of people in the statistical sense of the term.


I beg to differ.
Thyroid being one.

If it is a thyroid condition causing weight problems then it is manageable if not treatable, and once symptoms are well controlled it ceases to be responsible for peoples weight problems and the issue is once again sedentary life style.

Phill
04-Feb-11, 18:18
How much more neglect of personal responsibility for (today I'm singling out) fat people's own health do we need to see?

Fixed it for you.

Apparently we in the UK have gotten about 4 inches taller in the last century too.

shazzap
04-Feb-11, 18:19
And I am telling you that it is categorically not 'a lot' of people in the statistical sense of the term.



If it is a thyroid condition causing weight problems then it is manageable if not treatable, ans once symptoms are well controlled it ceases to be responsible for peoples weight problems and the issue is once again sedentary life style.

Have you got personal knowledge of this condition.
4 years and mine is still yet to be contolled. Very hard to manage. I doubt i am the only one.

canadagirl
04-Feb-11, 18:21
If it is a thyroid condition causing weight problems then it is manageable if not treatable, and once symptoms are well controlled it ceases to be responsible for peoples weight problems and the issue is once again sedentary life style.
I have to jump in here and say yes, if you are putting on weight get your thyroid checked and/or take some kelp. I almost starved myself once while putting on weight and it was sluggish thyroid.

Corrie 3
04-Feb-11, 18:26
Tell you what.....Lets just use the NHS for thin, non-smokers or drug takers, non drinkers and only people who go to the Gym regularly....How does that sound, fair enough or what?

And what about the money all these people have paid into the NHS all their lives, will that go to treat only the super fit people of our Nation?

I just hope the topic starter doesnt put on weight in her later years, she may just get left by the roadside!!!

C3....:roll::roll:

shazzap
04-Feb-11, 18:28
I have to jump in here and say yes, if you are putting on weight get your thyroid checked and/or take some kelp. I almost starved myself once while putting on weight and it was sluggish thyroid.

Had mine removed with Radio iodine treatment.
But i cannot get my dosage right.
So if i take one dose for so long i get sluggish, tired, constipated etc etc. So then have to take a higher dose, am ok for a while, then. Jittery, shaking, palpitations, diarrhoea
etc etc. Not so easy to control, is it.
Nearly forgot to add. I wish i could go for a good long walk, like i used to.

shazzap
04-Feb-11, 18:32
Tell you what.....Lets just use the NHS for thin, non-smokers or drug takers, non drinkers and only people who go to the Gym regularly....How does that sound, fair enough or what?

And what about the money all these people have paid into the NHS all their lives, will that go to treat only the super fit people of our Nation?

I just hope the topic starter doesnt put on weight in her later years, she may just get left by the roadside!!!

C3....:roll::roll:

Well said............

ducati
04-Feb-11, 18:35
Tell you what.....Lets just use the NHS for thin, non-smokers or drug takers, non drinkers and only people who go to the Gym regularly....How does that sound, fair enough or what?

And what about the money all these people have paid into the NHS all their lives, will that go to treat only the super fit people of our Nation?

I just hope the topic starter doesnt put on weight in her later years, she may just get left by the roadside!!!

C3....:roll::roll:

And don't do any dangerous sports or activities or drive or work up ladders or walk down the street or put the kettle on or......live on canal boats.

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 18:38
Have you got personal knowledge of this condition.
4 years and mine is still yet to be contolled. Very hard to manage.
O.k well I do not personally have this condition but I know lots about it. I am sorry to hear it is not under control. If you think it is still a problem then you should speak to your GP about it. I would like to add that hypothyroidism is a relatively uncommon disease but this brings me on to my next point that hypothyroidism merely predisposes people to gain weight. It is actually a good example since it should not be an excuse. Further it should even make people with the disease more active about managing their weight not less. This brings me back to my original point that tackling obesity is an active process involving people taking responsibility. Or not as the case is in today's society.

Kodiak
04-Feb-11, 18:40
Had mine removed with Radio iodine treatment.
But i cannot get my dosage right.
So if i take one dose for so long i get sluggish, tired, constipated etc etc. So then have to take a higher dose, am ok for a while, then. Jittery, shaking, palpitations, diarrhoea
etc etc. Not so easy to control, is it.
Nearly forgot to add. I wish i could go for a good long walk, like i used to.

I know exactly what you mean, I really do.

I had a complete Thyroidectomy on 14th February 1978 and since then my Thyroid count has been up and down like a Yo-Yo. I have been getting your exact symptoms for 30 years now and it does not get any easier.

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 18:50
Tell you what.....Lets just use the NHS for thin, non-smokers or drug takers, non drinkers and only people who go to the Gym regularly....How does that sound, fair enough or what?

And what about the money all these people have paid into the NHS all their lives, will that go to treat only the super fit people of our Nation?

I just hope the topic starter doesnt put on weight in her later years, she may just get left by the roadside!!!

C3....:roll::roll:

Actually Daniel is not a Womens name. I never said they should have their health care taken away from them. I fully believe in the founding principles of the NHS. It states that anyone and everyone should be treated no matter what their social status, ethnicity, sex, weight etc. The thread started about a discussion how money was spent in the NHS on obesity and whether there wasn't actually a better solution. It is naive to think that the NHS can afford to pay for everything with cuts or rationing becoming inevitable. Think about this, should we be spending so much on a lifestyle choice or on diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis? or Cancer? or Multiple Sclerosis? or Muscular Dystrophy?

Please can we remain on topic without digressing and discussing other lifestyle choices like smoking, drug abuse, dangerous behaviour etc. Since we all know they are important issues when talking about spending in the NHS but this topic was started purely to discuss obesity.

bekisman
04-Feb-11, 19:01
"this topic was started purely to discuss obesity." When you starting on the rest, or is this a pet project?

Corrie 3
04-Feb-11, 19:04
Actually Daniel is not a Womens name.
My apologies for getting your sex wrong Daniel, you are the first ever bloke I have known that is bothered by the nations obesity and what it costs the NHS.
Before you start going on about ambulances being a waste I think you have to look at the management structure of the NHS and the non jobs that are about, then you ought to get rid of the non jobs...especially the fat ones !!!!

C3.

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 19:08
When you starting on the rest, or is this a pet project?

If you want to talk about other healthcare issues then feel free to start another thread, I was really only interested in discussing resource rationing in the NHS relating to obesity as exemplified by the article linked at the top.

Bazeye
04-Feb-11, 19:18
And what about the money all these people have paid into the NHS all their lives, will that go to treat only the super fit people of our Nation?C3....:roll::roll:

Its the people who havent paid a penny into the NHS that should be refused. And before anyone gets on their high horse, I refer to certain people who choose not to contribute and not to genuine cases.

shazzap
04-Feb-11, 19:19
I know exactly what you mean, I really do.

I had a complete Thyroidectomy on 14th February 1978 and since then my Thyroid count has been up and down like a Yo-Yo. I have been getting your exact symptoms for 30 years now and it does not get any easier.

It is sooooooooooo debilitating isn't it. What gets me is the inability to sometimes make decisions, also the tirdness. My medication seems to kick in on a night, as i then am wide awake and hungry. Yet during the day have no appetite what so ever.

Phill
04-Feb-11, 21:26
So what do we do? Keep to 'normal' ambulances where the crews could end up with injuries due to not having the proper kit for manual handling that is clearly available. And no doubt there will be claims put in for compensation which are paid for by, wait for it, the NHS. Oh and while their off work the job role is covered by overtime, more cost.
Possibly this will see extra crews being sent to assist as they haven't got the right kit to start with, twice the staffing and resource cost?

But it's OK we've saved a few grand out of the transport procurement budget.

Obesity is a problem, a big problem (no pun intended) and growing.
How do we deal with it? Sit back and stop putting any cash into it and just tell people not to be fat, that'll do it!

Whilst were singling out this 'lifestyle choice' how do you propose we save cash dealing with it? How do we deal with obesity and not spend money on it?

northener
04-Feb-11, 22:46
Did someone mention pies?

ShelleyCowie
04-Feb-11, 22:47
Tell you what.....Lets just use the NHS for thin, non-smokers or drug takers, non drinkers and only people who go to the Gym regularly....How does that sound, fair enough or what?

C3....:roll::roll:

Awww no healthcare for Shelley then :( Lol.

Daniel, are you a health care professional? or involved with it in any way? Either you are or you really do alot of research!

You may be right, it could be a solid topic. Personally i believe that it is good use of NHS money. Anything bought by the NHS is good use of their money, what would we do without the NHS? As far as im aware there are not many other countries with free health care like we get here. Upgrading ambulances has to be done at some point because there is always new technology that will be used within them, making them suitable for the larger person is something that is required.

Lets make an example, Claire is 32 stone in weight, she has collapsed on the street and is having trouble breathing and complaining of a sore chest. Someone calls the ambulance, paramedics arrive on scene and suggest possible heart attack. She appears to have also injured herself from collapsing so dont want her to move alot, oh dear, our stretcher isnt going to fit her. Spinal board wont be suitable either as its not made for her size.

Yes thats probably the most drastic example, but it could still happen. How do you suggest getting her to hospital? That my friend, is why the NHS is keeping up with things.

Sorry just to add, iv had problems with my thyroid. Levels going up and down more than...oh no i better not make a joke! Anyway, i personally choose not to take any form of medication for it. But yes, its a struggle to loose weight with it. But hey, i dont mind!

Moira
04-Feb-11, 22:49
Here is a link to a news article about new ambulances for fat people. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880

What do people think? Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand? How much more neglect of personal responsibility for peoples own health do we need to see?

This is purely a discussion on obesity no comments about smoking, drug abuse, suicide etc which may be considered neglect of ones health.

Fascinating first post Danielbrooks. Welcome to the forums.

I think you think some of us are not capable of thinking.

It's particularly interesting that you are trying to dictate the direction of this thread. Why single out obesity?

bekisman
04-Feb-11, 23:07
Fascinating first post Danielbrooks. Welcome to the forums.

I think you think some of us are not capable of thinking.

It's particularly interesting that you are trying to dictate the direction of this thread. Why single out obesity?
I keep asking him that as well:confused

Danielbrooks
04-Feb-11, 23:39
Fascinating first post Danielbrooks. Welcome to the forums.

I think you think some of us are not capable of thinking.

It's particularly interesting that you are trying to dictate the direction of this thread. Why single out obesity?


I keep asking him that as well:confused

I'm not singling out obesity as the only contentious area when it comes to NHS spending, but it was the issue raised in the original article, which had interested me, I wasn't dictating the direction of the thread, I just thought it'd be easier to have a coherent discussion if we limited the scope of the debate to one topic.

Dadie
04-Feb-11, 23:51
Obesity,
Health and safety,
Ambulance technicians....
Insurance claims for backs put out etc....

Joboco
05-Feb-11, 00:31
Sorry but this is all a bit too heavy for me.

squidge
05-Feb-11, 00:38
Hmm let's see Daniel... Are you fat? I am. And according to your posts I am greedy, lazy and don't take responsibility for my life, health and well being. I posted this a few weeks ago and I will copy it here for you. Maybe you consider I make a choice. You appear to think I pay no regard to what I stuff down my lazy fat throat. Your question also implies that should I be too fat for NHS equipment then that should be my own stupid fat fault.

Jar you are right when you say the overweight are the last safe bet for mickey taking. I am a fat lady. A big girl. Dawn French style lol. Most of my life if I am honest. I have had five babies and been fit and healthy most of my life. But I am a fat girl. The thing that has changed over the last wee while is people's attitude to me, their assumptions about me. I have been told that my children WILL be fat too.... None of them are. That I should cut out the processed and ready meals I eat cos they are often high In fat and sugar... I don't eat ready meals or much in the way of processed food. I cook healthy meals for my family and give them nutritious food. It has been assumed that i must eat takeaways five nights a week when if we have a takeaway once a month we are lucky lol. Never mind eating three at one sitting. I
drink so little these days I have started describing myself as a non drinker.

The assumption has changed from people seeing me as an ordinary woman who struggles with her weight to me being a greedy lazy selfish
cow. I eat no more than anyone in my house and I'm the only fat person. I run around after babies all day,I walk the dog, clean house, do the washing and so on and so on. I don't live to eat aaldtimer, but I'm never going to be a size 12 and stay there. Food is a pleasure but it's not the only pleasure in my life. It's not even the greatest pleasure.
So here I am at new year looking at diets again. Don't assume that what is on tv is representative of real life. If we all did that, showed a bit of empathy, a bit of nouse to know that what we see is not true for everyone then maybe I could stop feeling defensive. It annoys me to feel like that
I'm 47 and I have cared little about peoples opinions for most of my life but this is starting to get on my nerves. I even had one rude person ask whether my darling babies were IVF and when I said they were the regular kind she expressed surprise that someone my age and as fat as me could still get pregnant. Where do people get off thinking they can
be so rude.

I have an underactive thyroid gland but it's well controlled, I have done every diet imaginable and made little or no difference as it comes off for awhile then goes back on.

Daniel...I do NOT choose to be fat, I am just me. I didn't choose to spend my entire adult life dieting. I deserve to be treated by the NHS just like you and if they have to provide a larger BP cuff or a flaming reinforced articulated lorry then I should STILL be treated.

Moira
05-Feb-11, 01:27
I'm not singling out obesity as the only contentious area when it comes to NHS spending, but it was the issue raised in the original article, which had interested me, I wasn't dictating the direction of the thread, I just thought it'd be easier to have a coherent discussion if we limited the scope of the debate to one topic.

Yes you are, or were. Thankfully the members on this forum are not easily dictated to.

Danielbrooks
05-Feb-11, 02:03
Hmm let's see Daniel... Are you fat? I am. And according to your posts I am greedy, lazy and don't take responsibility for my life, health and well being. I posted this a few weeks ago and I will copy it here for you. Maybe you consider I make a choice. You appear to think I pay no regard to what I stuff down my lazy fat throat. Your question also implies that should I be too fat for NHS equipment then that should be my own stupid fat fault.

I'm really sorry if this has offended or upset you, but this thread was never meant to be taken personally or seen as an attack on obese people. I don't know you, I don't know anything about your lifestyle and to be honest when I started this thread I never envisaged a scenario where people would feel the need to justify their personal circumstances, I though this would be a discussion about funding in the NHS and healthcare ethics.


Daniel...I do NOT choose to be fat, I am just me. I didn't choose to spend my entire adult life dieting. I deserve to be treated by the NHS just like you and if they have to provide a larger BP cuff or a flaming reinforced articulated lorry then I should STILL be treated.

At no point did I suggest that people who are overweight or obese shouldn't receive treatment on the NHS, what I was asking was if people thought whether or not an argument could be made that in some circumstances certain groups of patients, in this particular case morbidly obese people, are less deserving of healthcare resource allocation than others, given the undeniable limitation of money available to the NHS. When there are patients who cannot receive optimum treatments for their condition, like those suffering from Rheumatoid Arthritis or Cancer or many other diseases, do you really think that the unfair burden placed on the NHS by obese people (and here I don't mean obese individuals, again I feel I should stress this is not a personal discussion) is anything but selfish. If you don't think this argument is valid then I'd be interested to hear you're reasons why not.


Yes you are, or were. Thankfully the members on this forum are not easily dictated to.

Thanks for inviting me to the forum in your first post on this thread, it's really appreciated. I really thought that the point of having thread titles and original posts was to set a topic which was open for discussion to anyone who was interested in it, you don't seem to have commented at all on the issue I raised orf the article I included a link to, if you don't want to talk about those things then what is it you would like to discuss on this thread.

Gronnuck
05-Feb-11, 09:16
Your choice of language and in particular the phrase, "Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand?" indicates the contempt with which you view bigger people. You can argue all you want Danielbrooks but the tone of your original post indicates a bigotry rarely seen in someone's first posting.
Now do us a favour and reveal who you really are. As someone has already mentioned you could well be a disaffected former member who was banned.

For all the bigger members out there; you don't have to justify yourself to anyone anymore than the many people who use the NHS resources for a myriad of other issues.

squidge
05-Feb-11, 10:13
Daniel I would stop short of using the word bigot. I don't agree particularly that you have demonstrated that but your language was that which is used on tv programmes and in newspaper articles about fat people all the time. Please don't think either that I am 'justifying' myself. I am not. I am standing up for myself and others like me who are just the way we are and don't indulge in the sort of gluttony which fills TV programmes and daily mail pages.

Whether you like it or not you are asking a question about a personal issue and you will get a personal response. What you have asked is whether fat people should be given treatment. Treatment for what? Ingrowing toe nails? Asthma? Heart disease? Diabetes?

The answer has to be yes. Who decides who is too fat? Who decides who is too fat? Who decides someone is a lazy fat greedy slob and who is just unfortunate? What factors do they take into account when making that decision? The NHS provides health care for all and that must remain. Where does it stop otherwise? Fat people are more likely to have fat children so let's get them all sterilised? I know you don't want a dance into smoking, alcohol or drugs but the same
questions apply. It is morally and socially distasteful to refuse to treat someone because society does not like the way they look.

As for the financial situation.... We need to pay more into the NHS and we need to be smarter about the use of money. Example.... Gastric bypass costs what... £3000 .... Maybe more. A ten week course at
weight watchers or slimming world costs about £50. Lighter life costs £72 per week ( my god! £72 a week!!!!!) it maybe that better results
could be seen by using a voucher scheme for one of these? If you are a low income then they can be expensive and it could save money in the
long run.

Finally I will take issue with your suggestion that fat people are selfish and place an unfair burden on the NHS. You make the point in your first
few sentences that you don't know me or my lifestyle. That's true Daniel, you don't, neither do you know the fat man down the street, the morbidly obese person who lives in the next town. Yet you are prepared to lump all these people as selfish, greedy and lacking in personal responsibility. I would respectfully suggest that you know diddly squat daniel.
Decisions about medical treatment should be made on an individual basis with the emphasis on individuals not based on arbitrary decisions by people who think a whole group of individuals are the way they are because they are fat, lazy, selfish and eat nothing but takeaways and coke at every meal.

orkneycadian
05-Feb-11, 11:14
I would get used to inequalities like this if I were you, because if they ain't already here, there a coming.

Take NHS dentistry. If your someone that doesn't bother to look after your teeth, in a heck of a lot of places these days, expect no NHS help until your past the point of helping and a simple extraction case.

Take Law and Order. Unless you've been murdered, or have committed a traffic offence, in a great many parts of the country, the police don't want to know you nowadays either. "Whats that sir? You've been burgled and your wifes been raped? - Sorry, theres not likely anything we can do - Heres the number of a counsellor you can call"

Expectations of NHS goes up and up, funding meantime goes down and down. You don't need to be an accountant to figure out that they won't be able to please all of the people, all of the time!

The Drunken Duck
05-Feb-11, 13:29
Some people do have conditions that end up in obesity but they are a small percentage of the obesity crisis that we see in the country today. In that case it IS an illness and they should be treated. But if someone willingly eats themselves into obesity though they should be told to jog on. Literally. As a taxpayer I dont see why I should fund new ambulances needed because of other peoples gluttony. In an NHS where cancer patients are being told drugs are not available for being too expensive how can we justify this outlay ??

Eat less, exercise more. Simple. If someone would rather sit in front of the TV cramming scoff down their neck rather than go for a walk then their condition is their problem. I went through quite a serious depression a few years back and my GP said that I should just go for a walk and excercise when I felt low, its proven to release "feel good" endorhpins into the brain. I followed his advice and it worked, glad I did rather than sit on the sofa feeling sorry for myself and comfort eating. A few years on I am almost three stone lighter and my ideal weight. I also eat a lot healthier, exercise and feel a lot better. No return of the dark depths of depression either. Not a coincidence in my book.

Nice to see the usual pattern though on subjects like this though. It always descends into a combination of excuses and outrage. If someone can explain to me how someone, who does not have a genuine illness or condition that causes it, isnt obese through no ones fault but their own I would love to hear it. The OP has a point but we live in a society today where an excuse is made for everything and personal responsibility has been overtaken by the never ending army of people willing to make excuses for anything. Hardly surprising he has been flamed.

If your obese and dont have an illness its YOUR problem that only YOU can solve, and I dont see why I should pay for it, if you dont want to sort yourself out then I suggest you fund the extra cost to the NHS for treating you and/or look in the dictionary for sympathy. You'll find it right between "ship" and "syphillis". Funny how when people suggest smokers should not be treated on the NHS people rush to agree whine about their "filthy habit", ignoring the fact it puts a lot of cash into the economy, but say the same about salad dodgers and its a totally different reaction to what, in my book is an addiction just as bad as nicotine.

Leanne
05-Feb-11, 13:37
Eat less, exercise more. Simple.

It's hard but that is what needs to be done. It's not about dieting it's about lifestyle change. It takes a LOT of willpower but fat people can get thin (even the few that do have genuine medical conditions).

All the claims of "I don't choose to be fat" well you do - if you don't actively choose to get thinner/healthier then you are, by default, choosing to be fat. I haven't dieted until now as I love food and didn't feel the need. The weight has now crept up and I see that I do need to stop being silly and indulging myself and start getting healthy.

Think about it - your empty stomach has a volume roughly the size of your fist. Portion sizes should reflect this.

bekisman
05-Feb-11, 14:27
Oh that's ok then, smokers 'cover' their costs, plus they flake out earlier, so less cost to the exchequer..

Yours; average sized 'outraged' male..

Danielbrooks
05-Feb-11, 15:14
Your choice of language and in particular the phrase, "Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand?" indicates the contempt with which you view bigger people.

I am genuinely sorry if you felt I was attacking obese people in any way. I used evocative imagery simply because I thought it might help to pique people interests an facilitate a discussion on the subject, so once again, I'm sorry that it's been misinterpreted. I do not hold obese people in contempt, I do not despise them nor do I disrespect them as individuals, however I do have certain concerns about widespread attitudes relating to health and healthcare.


You can argue all you want Danielbrooks but the tone of your original post indicates a bigotry rarely seen in someone's first posting.
Now do us a favour and reveal who you really are. As someone has already mentioned you could well be a disaffected former member who was banned.

I'm really not, I am, however, someone who's taken a casual interest in reading the forums previously and has always been impressed by the lively and interesting level of debate often exhibited by it's members and thought I might trying joining in (I'm starting to wonder if that was a mistake).

Interestingly on a previous thread, concerning classroom assistants, Gronnuck, you wrote:


Where are the parents in all this? Do we absolve them of all responsibility? I would have thought that the educating of children involved parents too!
The truth is that in recent years many parents have become too reliant on someone else to bring up their offspring. It is not uncommon for children to arrive in reception class unable to carry out the simplest of tasks. There was always one or two children with difficulties and they were discreetly helped. But these days many children can't chew their food properly, they eat with their fingers and many aren't even properly toilet trained! It seems to me in that post you were condemning parents who show apathy towards their children's upbringing and then expect the state (ie teachers and classroom assistants) to resolve the issues for then, in the post you advocate the personal responsibility of parents to help educate their children, right? If so do you not think it's then at least a little hypocritical for you to come out in favour of obese people being allowed to eat as much as they like and exercise as little as possible and as such not taking any responsibility for their own health with the inevitable consequence that they end up relying upon the state to pay for their care which will cost substantially more than if they'd chosen to live a healthier life?


The answer has to be yes. Who decides who is too fat? Who decides who is too fat? Who decides someone is a lazy fat greedy slob and who is just unfortunate? What factors do they take into account when making that decision? The NHS provides health care for all and that must remain. Where does it stop otherwise? Fat people are more likely to have fat children so let's get them all sterilised? I know you don't want a dance into smoking, alcohol or drugs but the same
questions apply. It is morally and socially distasteful to refuse to treat someone because society does not like the way they look.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the way people look, it's about the fact that a large number of large people seem to believe that they are entitled to eat as much as they like, that it is their right, and in fact I would agree with that, I believe in personal freedom, I think people should be allowed to live their lives the way they want to, but what I would say is that it is at best morally dubious and at worst downright selfish for those people to then harbour the belief that everyone else should have to go out of their way to provide for them, and you can't claim that isn't the case because we know, even without the benefit of 21st century super science, that fat people are much higher risk for a plethora of preventable diseases which cost the NHS extortionate sums of money each year and you can't claim that it isn't an issue of choice, I'll admit that it isn't easy and I'll admit that there are a minority of patients for whom it is impossible to loose weight, but for almost all overweight people it comes down to a choice and that choice is to exchew personal responsibility in favour of their own short-term comfort and immediate gratification.


As for the financial situation.... We need to pay more into the NHS and we need to be smarter about the use of money. Example.... Gastric bypass costs what... £3000 .... Maybe more. A ten week course at
weight watchers or slimming world costs about £50. Lighter life costs £72 per week ( my god! £72 a week!!!!!) it maybe that better results
could be seen by using a voucher scheme for one of these? If you are a low income then they can be expensive and it could save money in the
long run.

An excellent point, I wholeheartedly agree that we should be looking at ways to tackle obesity through preventative measures, what does everyone else think of voucher schemes for things like weight watchers? or perhaps incentives for health centres and GPs to run their own health education courses? anyone have any other suggestions or ideas?

Gronnuck
05-Feb-11, 15:18
Some people do have conditions that end up in obesity but they are a small percentage of the obesity crisis that we see in the country today. In that case it IS an illness and they should be treated. But if someone willingly eats themselves into obesity though they should be told to jog on. Literally. As a taxpayer I dont see why I should fund new ambulances needed because of other peoples gluttony. In an NHS where cancer patients are being told drugs are not available for being too expensive how can we justify this outlay ??You might take the same attitude about the cost of other ‘lifestyle choices’ like drugs, alcohol, dangerous pursuits. To take just one issue and try and isolate it smacks of discrimination.


Eat less, exercise more. Simple. If someone would rather sit in front of the TV cramming scoff down their neck rather than go for a walk then their condition is their problem. I went through quite a serious depression a few years back and my GP said that I should just go for a walk and excercise when I felt low, its proven to release "feel good" endorhpins into the brain. I followed his advice and it worked, glad I did rather than sit on the sofa feeling sorry for myself and comfort eating. A few years on I am almost three stone lighter and my ideal weight. I also eat a lot healthier, exercise and feel a lot better. No return of the dark depths of depression either. Not a coincidence in my book.
There will be smokers and drug users who will offer the same kind of example; so nothing new there.


Nice to see the usual pattern though on subjects like this though. It always descends into a combination of excuses and outrage. If someone can explain to me how someone, who does not have a genuine illness or condition that causes it, isnt obese through no ones fault but their own I would love to hear it. The OP has a point but we live in a society today where an excuse is made for everything and personal responsibility has been overtaken by the never ending army of people willing to make excuses for anything. Hardly surprising he has been flamed.
Of course there will be people who will offer excuses for their indolent lifestyle. However IMO the outrage at the OP was at the assumptions he made and the tone he used.


If your obese and dont have an illness its YOUR problem that only YOU can solve, and I dont see why I should pay for it, if you dont want to sort yourself out then I suggest you fund the extra cost to the NHS for treating you and/or look in the dictionary for sympathy.

Would you say the same of drug users, binge drinkers, hobby sailors and mountaineers? They all cost the NHS; they all take resources away from the Cancer patients you mentioned.

Gronnuck
05-Feb-11, 15:28
Interestingly on a previous thread, concerning classroom assistants, Gronnuck, you wrote:

It seems to me in that post you were condemning parents who show apathy towards their children's upbringing and then expect the state (ie teachers and classroom assistants) to resolve the issues for then, in the post you advocate the personal responsibility of parents to help educate their children, right? If so do you not think it's then at least a little hypocritical for you to come out in favour of obese people being allowed to eat as much as they like and exercise as little as possible and as such not taking any responsibility for their own health with the inevitable consequence that they end up relying upon the state to pay for their care which will cost substantially more than if they'd chosen to live a healthier life?

Yes I was condemning parents who show apathy towards their children's behaviour.
I can't see how you can accuse me of hypocracy; nowhere in any of my posts have I said I support people being allowed to eat as much as they like and exercise as little as possible.
People make lifestyle choices. Some lifestyle choices are dangerous and unhealthy. To pick out just one group of people and their lifestyle choice smacks of descrimination.

sandyr1
05-Feb-11, 15:29
[QUOTE=Danielbrooks;816355]I'm really sorry if this has offended or upset you, but this thread was never meant to be taken personally or seen as an attack on obese people. I don't know you, I don't know anything about your lifestyle and to be honest when I started this thread I never envisaged a scenario where people would feel the need to justify their personal circumstances, I though this would be a discussion about funding in the NHS and healthcare ethics.

DB....I really don't think you have to be too apologetic to some people.
There are some wild accusations thrown around on the Org....e.g. because I disagreed with a 'Learned' person, first I was asked if I was threatening them, then accused of such and reported....and I live 3,500 miles away.
I agree with some of what you say....and there is a severe concern with the 'doing more with less'.
We have a saying in the West...You are your own Liquor Control Board!
That goes for all matters in life.

RecQuery
05-Feb-11, 15:31
Taking this to it's logical conclusion why not stop treating:


People who engage in sports that have the potential to cause an injury
Terminate any pregnancy where the child born will have medical problems
Refuse to treat smokers or drinkers
Refuse to treat women who are far more likely to use the resources of the NHS

I have a few other tongue-in-cheek examples, but I trust the point has been made. I'd like to point out also that being overweight does not make a person unhealthy... here's my obligatory Penn and Teller sceptical link (http://www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=854206)

There are tons of things I don't like my tax money being spent on that other people probably use and enjoy that's the society we live in. I'm sick and tired of hearing retarded and bigoted opinions in the media. Just as an aside I notice while having to listen to Radio 2 in my workplace that most of the of the people with these opinions tend to be older/pensioners. One of the things I don't like my tax money being spent on is pensions but then again as I've said that's the society we live in.

I'm often amazed that fat people seem to be the one demographic it's okay to insult, hell it's practically institutionalised. Here's another point homosexuality is call a 'lifestyle choice' perhaps we should try to change that.

bekisman
05-Feb-11, 15:33
[QUOTE=Danielbrooks;816355]I'm really sorry if this has offended or upset you, but this thread was never meant to be taken personally or seen as an attack on obese people. I don't know you, I don't know anything about your lifestyle and to be honest when I started this thread I never envisaged a scenario where people would feel the need to justify their personal circumstances, I though this would be a discussion about funding in the NHS and healthcare ethics.

DB....I really don't think you have to be too apologetic to some people.
There are some wild accusations thrown around on the Org....e.g. because I disagreed with a 'Learned' person, first I was asked if I was threatening them, then accused of such and reported....and I live 3,500 miles away.
I agree with some of what you say....and there is a severe concern with the 'doing more with less'.
We have a saying in the West...You are your own Liquor Control Board!
That goes for all matters in life.
"You are your own Liquor Control Board!" - I like that...

Well with me being a bit unique (or a pain in the arse to some), cos I don't drink, I don't smoke, I don't take drugs, I'm not overweight, but I've cost the NHS an awful lot of money with operations resulting from duty in the Forces and Fire Service..
But mustn't complain as it seems it's my own stupid fault for taking them on as professions in the first place.

Danielbrooks
05-Feb-11, 15:47
Taking this to it's logical conclusion why not stop treating:



People who engage in sports that have the potential to cause an injury
Terminate any pregnancy where the child born will have medical problems
Refuse to treat smokers or drinkers
Refuse to treat women who are far more likely to use the resources of the NHS


I have a few other tongue-in-cheek examples, but I trust the point has been made. I'd like to point out also that being overweight does not make a person unhealthy... here's my obligatory Penn and Teller sceptical link (http://www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=854206)

The NHS may be an institution based on idealogical principle, but it is not one that deals with them on a day to day basis, it is a service concerned with practical solutions to real problems, andthe cost of treating sports injuries, mountain climbing accidents and IVDUs is tiny compared to the financial burden placed on health services by obesity-related disease. If it seems that I've singled out obesity it is only because compared to other preventable social factors that impact healthcare it is the most prevalent and the one that has the most real financial cost.


I'm often amazed that fat people seem to be the one demographic it's okay to insult, hell it's practically institutionalised. Here's another point homosexuality is call a 'lifestyle choice' perhaps we should try to change that.

I'm not trying to insult anyone, I was just hoping for a bit of a discussion.

And homosexuality is only called a 'choice' by those with thoroughly outdated views, sexual orientation is an aspect of someone's identity not something that's chosen, unlike, say, consuming more calories than you're willing to expend.


DB....I really don't think you have to be too apologetic to some people. Thank you, but I genuinely don't mind apologising to people if they have a grievance, I didn't start this thread to 'outrage' people.

RecQuery
05-Feb-11, 16:19
The NHS may be an institution based on idealogical principle, but it is not one that deals with them on a day to day basis, it is a service concerned with practical solutions to real problems, andthe cost of treating sports injuries, mountain climbing accidents and IVDUs is tiny compared to the financial burden placed on health services by obesity-related disease. If it seems that I've singled out obesity it is only because compared to other preventable social factors that impact healthcare it is the most prevalent and the one that has the most real financial cost.



I'm not trying to insult anyone, I was just hoping for a bit of a discussion.

And homosexuality is only called a 'choice' by those with thoroughly outdated views, sexual orientation is an aspect of someone's identity not something that's chosen, unlike, say, consuming more calories than you're willing to expend.

Thank you, but I genuinely don't mind apologising to people if they have a grievance, I didn't start this thread to 'outrage' people.

Okay then I'd ask for a citation or reference on the statement that overweight people are causing a burden on the NHS and a rebuttal to the points raised in the Penn and Teller link. I'd like something beyond the stats the NHS uses for smokers which are that if a smoker happens to die of anything it's linked to the fact they smoked. Coincidentally that's the same tactic the Police use for those who play violent video games.

Moving on I'd like to make the point that humans are essentially programmed to eat and have sex. We've come up with birth control to deal with the consequences on one but nothing yet to deal with consequences of the other.

If anyone can't be bothered checking out the Penn and Teller like I'd also like to make the point that the BMI is a load of crap.

bekisman
05-Feb-11, 16:21
Danielbrooks "If it seems that I've singled out obesity it is only because compared to other preventable social factors that impact healthcare it is the most prevalent and the one that has the most real financial cost."

Eh? what about the £3.8billion spent on Incapacity Benefit for Drug addicts and alcoholics - surely that's a "preventable social factor"?

bekisman
05-Feb-11, 16:23
Okay then I'd ask for a citation or reference on the statement that overweight people are causing a burden on the NHS and a rebuttal to the points raised in the Penn and Teller link. I'd like something beyond the stats the NHS uses for smokers which are that if a smoker happens to die of anything it's linked to the fact they smoked. Coincidentally that's the same tactic the Police use for those who play violent video games.

Moving on I'd like to make the point that humans are essentially programmed to eat and have sex. We've come up with birth control to deal with the consequences on one but nothing yet to deal with consequences of the other.

If anyone can't be bothered checking out the Penn and Teller like I'd also like to make the point that the BMI is a load of crap.

BMI: "For example, every member of the England Rugby Team would be categorised as Obese"

Danielbrooks
05-Feb-11, 16:27
Danielbrooks "If it seems that I've singled out obesity it is only because compared to other preventable social factors that impact healthcare it is the most prevalent and the one that has the most real financial cost."

Eh? what about the £3.8billion spent on Incapacity Benefit for Drug addicts and alcoholics - surely that's a "preventable social factor"?

I'm not saying it isn't a problem, I'm afraid I don't know as much about Incapacity Benefits as I do about NHS spending, but what I am saying is that obesity definitely is.

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publichealth/Obesity/index.htm

Joboco
05-Feb-11, 16:28
I have not read all the replies to this but, When shopping in Tesco recently what did I see. Two Overweight people, one with the obligatory crutch type walking stick, (you know, the one that clips to the forearm, is not needed, but gets more benefits). And what did the trolley mainly consist of, lemon pancakes, scones, chocolate, booz, full fat milk.

Now go on tell me they cant help it.

That's not to say that all overweight people are like these two.

ducati
05-Feb-11, 16:34
That's not to say that all overweight people are like these two.

Oh dear :roll:

If you looked in my trolly you would see nothing but vegitarian food and skimmed milk-I'm still fat!

Danielbrooks
05-Feb-11, 16:50
I'd also like to make the point that the BMI is a load of crap.

No it's not, it may not be perfect, everyone knows that it doesn't account for people with abnormal fat:muscle ratios, as in the case of professional athletes, but it is a good indicator in the majority of the people and there are very good reasons why high BMI populations have a correlatory relationship with certain diseases like diabetes, hypertension, heart attack and heart failure.

bekisman
05-Feb-11, 16:59
No it's not, it may not be perfect, everyone knows that it doesn't account for people with abnormal fat:muscle ratios, as in the case of professional athletes, but it is a good indicator in the majority of the people and there are very good reasons why high BMI populations have a correlatory relationship with certain diseases like diabetes, hypertension, heart attack and heart failure.

Top 10 reasons why the BMI is bogus

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106268439

ShelleyCowie
05-Feb-11, 17:21
No it's not, it may not be perfect, everyone knows that it doesn't account for people with abnormal fat:muscle ratios, as in the case of professional athletes, but it is a good indicator in the majority of the people and there are very good reasons why high BMI populations have a correlatory relationship with certain diseases like diabetes, hypertension, heart attack and heart failure.

Seriously how many times have you been asked now if you are a healthcare professional? Because im still waiting for a straight answer!

To me, yep BMI is totally bogus!!

I know some people who are the healthiest eaters and exercise so much that they put me to shame, yet im not as big as them! Before i had my 2 kiddies i was a size 8-10. After my first, i managed to get back into a size 10 but not for long as i found out i was pregnant again. 2nd pregnancy i was in a size 14. Biggest iv ever been in my life. Now, 5 months after having my 2nd im back into a size 12. Im well and truely comfortable with my size, i dont think i am obese, yet iv joined the gym and even went for a swim this morning. I dont honestly care about what size i am, just a few jiggly bits i want toned again.

So, if the day ever comes that me or someone i know needs something to help them be more confortable in an ambulance situation then let the NHS lash at it!

Tell you where they are wasting their money, lassies who go see their GP, want a nose job or boob job because they are "depressed" and are far from it, just want to look glamourous! That funding should be saved for those who genuinely require it, such as disfigurement or implants after breast cancer. (thats my opinion)

RecQuery
05-Feb-11, 17:26
No it's not, it may not be perfect, everyone knows that it doesn't account for people with abnormal fat:muscle ratios, as in the case of professional athletes, but it is a good indicator in the majority of the people and there are very good reasons why high BMI populations have a correlatory relationship with certain diseases like diabetes, hypertension, heart attack and heart failure.

I beg to differ. It was created by a Belgian mathematician in the 1800s. It was a quick hack the guy came up with for the government to help them allocate resources. There are so many things wrong with it: the guy was a mathematician not a physician, why square a person height (actually the guy did that to hack it further), it makes no allowance for the relative proportions of bone, muscle and fat in the body, it's a bad statistic, no other statistic measurement is achieved in such away. Various other problems I'm despondent to list.

Instead it should be replaced by measuring the percentage of body fat but it won't be because that's too accurate, people in the nutrition and dieting industries will probably lose their jobs, it makes the numbers more normal, removes the 'obesity epidemic' from the media and just costs more to do and finally because the medical industry can't lobby the government for more money to deal with the 'obesity epidemic'

Garnet
05-Feb-11, 17:33
Dear Lord, I hope I don't regret this...dare I say...welcome to the Org DB..brave man re your post...however I do have to agree you did seem to come on rather strong..maybe not intentionaly, and to a great degree I agree with what you say regarding being responsible for our own health, having said that I suspect you are reasonably young, fit and have pretty good genes, lucky you if you are, however not everyone has such luck. I have a friend who eats less than a bird and still overweight (GP stumped) another (whom I just hate, lovely person tho) who could eat for Britain and is like a 'stick insect'. Yes some of us are overweight by comfort eating and that usually is a sure sign of depression which is no joke either, hense the O/weight. Since the NHS was started over 60yrs ago the concept was brilliant compared to the option, I love and am proud of theNHS, but not some of the idiots that run it, but I digress, people should really look after themselves and I include myself in that comment, but circumstances don't always allow, possibly if GP's when consulted sent patients to dietitions soon as a problem arises, maybe just maybe overweight could be nipped in the bud, after all what are dietitions there for I wonder? So DB maybe there's a way round the 'growing' problem and possibly it could be halted and there'd be no need for 'strenthening' ambulances, as for the extremely 'obese' there's always a way round it...necessity is the mother of invention.

changilass
05-Feb-11, 17:46
When healthy food is on a par price wise with the crap you can buy at farmfoods then maybe we with have a few lighter folk.

We eat a wide range of food that are reasonably healthy, but I know I could cut my food budget in half just by buying some of the crap that is available.

Childrens menus, when eating out mainly consist of chips with everything and a load of deep fried rubbish.

I asked on here last week about somewhere to go for a nice chicken salad, got very few replies, mainly because there aint many places to get one.

Phill
05-Feb-11, 18:02
I though this would be a discussion about funding in the NHS and healthcare ethics.No. You dictated this was to be about obesity.


At no point did I suggest that people who are overweight or obese shouldn't receive treatment on the NHS, what I was asking was if people thought whether or not an argument could be made that in some circumstances certain groups of patientsNo, you asked about pouring money down fat peoples throats. As Gronnuck points out, a very particular choice of words.


do you really think that the unfair burden placed on the NHS by obese people (and here I don't mean obese individuals, again I feel I should stress this is not a personal discussion) is anything but selfish.It does become personal to those that feel they are or have been told they are obese.


I really thought that the point of having thread titles and original posts was to set a topic which was open for discussion to anyone who was interested in it, you don't seem to have commented at all on the issue I raised orf the article I included a link to, if you don't want to talk about those things then what is it you would like to discuss on this thread.Hmm, I found the title interesting, and I saw what you did:waste - waist. Clever, I like it. But I did see what you did.

I did think that it may have been possible to reflect on a slightly wider issue of waste in the NHS and ethics.

I'm happy to discuss most topics, the issue of obesity, the implications on healthcare and future generations is a topic I'm happy to discuss when there is rational people to discuss it with, regardless of their opinion.
However when the opening line includes "pouring money down fat peoples throats" it is clear to me you are not really looking for rational discussion. You have a drum to bang and wish to try and stir up a hornets nest.

Do you have any answers to this problem (obesity) or do you think you might find them here. Or do your principles of healthcare for all actually fall into a line similar to 'everybody is equal but some are more equal than others'.

squidge
05-Feb-11, 19:31
There are people who eat like pigs and gorge themselves on sugar rich fatty foods and have no control and eat takeaways every night. My point is that many people here, like Daniel and (surprise surprise) drunken duck appear to lump everyone who is fat into one great mass as lazy fat gluttons.

There is not one fix that will fix it all. Fat people are fat in different ways and for different reasons and so all treatment needs to be individual. Targetted at the person. The same with smokers, alcoholics and drug addicts. All individuals are different and medical intervention needs to take this into account.

Can we afford it? We probably can't but actually we need to afford it and we should be looking at innovative ways of meeting costs and working on prevention. None of us want our taxes to increase but maybe we need to pay more in.

In the meantime I continue to try to find a way to lose weight. Guess what... I do more excercise and eat differently and who knows. Maybe after 20 years of it I have found the solution.

All of you that are holier than thou and smugly pontificate on how lazy and greedy Fat people are are welcome to come spend a weekend with us and then decide on which adjectives to use.

Pm me for a weekend to stay

Blazing Sporrans
05-Feb-11, 22:17
Here is a link to a news article about new ambulances for fat people. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880

What do people think? Should we pour more money down fat peoples throats or should we take a stand? How much more neglect of personal responsibility for peoples own health do we need to see?


Daniel, your eloquence indicates obvious intelligence, however the original post, making reference to pouring more money down fat people's throats does your argument no credit whatsoever. You might not have intended your comment to sound bigoted or fascist and you resent being labelled as such, however as an opening gambit on the .org then it can at best be described as extremely crass. Such an apparently biased perspective rightly attracts the overwhelming strength of feeling demonstrated by, it has to be conceded, the majority of posters on this thread. It's now up to you to demonstrate you aren't what people think you are...

Incidentally, someone enquired whether you work in healthcare. Did I miss the response? If not, I wonder what makes you particularly zealous on this subject?

Maccy
05-Feb-11, 22:47
Oh dear :roll:

If you looked in my trolley you would see nothing but vegetarian food and skimmed milk-I'm still fat!

But at least you try to eat correctly. Not like the two Joboco mentioned.

bekisman
05-Feb-11, 23:31
Daniel, your eloquence indicates obvious intelligence, however the original post, making reference to pouring more money down fat people's throats does your argument no credit whatsoever. You might not have intended your comment to sound bigoted or fascist and you resent being labelled as such, however as an opening gambit on the .org then it can at best be described as extremely crass. Such an apparently biased perspective rightly attracts the overwhelming strength of feeling demonstrated by, it has to be conceded, the majority of posters on this thread. It's now up to you to demonstrate you aren't what people think you are...

Incidentally, someone enquired whether you work in healthcare. Did I miss the response? If not, I wonder what makes you particularly zealous on this subject?
Quite agree with that.

His opening and very first post simply spouting the words "pouring more money down fat people's throats" was certainly a catalyst for lively reaction and discussion, and, maybe a pointer to a possible prejudice towards obese people.

We're not naive or shocked on here, we're not aghast or outraged by these comments.. many of us remember Percy toboggan and Freepress - now those were robust discussions we had. We're not easily shocked or our feelings despoiled, we don't (well most of us) flounce off when we get lambasted, but take it as a platform for sometimes explosive dialogue.

But he must accept that as an initial posting, he could have chosen a wider point of discussion instead of zeroing in on one aspect of health.. (and we still don't know his take on the health care profession..)

But, bottom line Daniel, welcome to the forum; what an entry!

Tristan
06-Feb-11, 11:16
Weight is easy to put on but very hard to get off. Although there are some people with with medical conditions most people who are "overweight" are that way because of over eating. Healthy eating is important for your health and well being but weight loss and gain is a matter of counting calories.
It is not about being a glutton and stuffing your face all it takes is small amounts of food to cause weight gain. If you eat one 2 finger kit kat or one apple a day above what your body needs you will put on about a pound of fat in a month or almost 12 pounds a year - that is almost a stone in weight from a very small daily overeat.

In addition most people need fewer calories than they think. There are better caloric need calculators but this one http://pediatrics.about.com/library/bl_calorie_calc.htm is simple to use and does give a better idea of caloric need than the quoted 2000 for women and the 2500 for men. If you use this calculator you will probably find your caloric need is less than the recommended amounts.
In addition the body is very reluctant to let go of fat once it has it. It is a slow process and requires careful eating, aerobic exercise and strength exercise to get the fat off and keep it off.
A good calorie tracker if http://www.fitday.com/ . If you accurately record everything you eat and drink I think you will be amazed at the results.

Phill
06-Feb-11, 17:45
Some valid points from Tristan.
Another thing to consider, unlike other addictions, (dare we mention any on this thread) food is more difficult to manage. Alcoholics with treatment learn to avoid alcohol. Drug users can learn to live without drugs. But we cannot avoid food.

Some figures for you. Cost to the Scottish NHS for:

Treating obesity £175m (2%) of the budget (2008 figures)
Treating alcohol abuse £2.25b (yup, billion) (2009 figures)
Treating cancer c£5b (I was unable to get a specific figure so far but 18 to 25 billion seems to be the UK costs.)

Arthritis costs £8billion to the Scottish economy.
MS costs £140m

sandyr1
06-Feb-11, 19:35
There are people who eat like pigs and gorge themselves on sugar rich fatty foods and have no control and eat takeaways every night. My point is that many people here, like Daniel and (surprise surprise) drunken duck appear to lump everyone who is fat into one great mass as lazy fat gluttons.

There is not one fix that will fix it all. Fat people are fat in different ways and for different reasons and so all treatment needs to be individual. Targetted at the person. The same with smokers, alcoholics and drug addicts. All individuals are different and medical intervention needs to take this into account.

Can we afford it? We probably can't but actually we need to afford it and we should be looking at innovative ways of meeting costs and working on prevention. None of us want our taxes to increase but maybe we need to pay more in.

In the meantime I continue to try to find a way to lose weight. Guess what... I do more excercise and eat differently and who knows. Maybe after 20 years of it I have found the solution.

All of you that are holier than thou and smugly pontificate on how lazy and greedy Fat people are are welcome to come spend a weekend with us and then decide on which adjectives to use.

Pm me for a weekend to stay

Just noticed that you seem to be the only person using the highlighted words, and included were Greedy & Lazy in another post.....Interesting!

A recent report out of London, called 'Simple Life Changes', stated that if people ate healthier, maintained a healthy weight, drank less and exercised more, up to one third of all Cancers could be prevented.

I think that the original poster has a good point.....e.g. A person is heavy.....18 stone.
They go to the Dr. and have to have an operation for say a Hernia or have difficulty breathing and they are a heavy smoker.....should they get the same treatment as a person who is fit and doesn't smoke. The risks are much greater that there will be problems....
I think we all agree that health and diet and non smoking is a good thing....

I don't think that any of us are 'Holier than Thou', just making a point on what is so very obvious!

bekisman
06-Feb-11, 20:15
Danielbrooks "If it seems that I've singled out obesity it is only because compared to other preventable social factors that impact healthcare it is the most prevalent and the one that has the most real financial cost."

Doesn't seem to 'weigh' in with Phill's posting?:

Treating obesity £175m (2%) of the budget (2008 figures)
Treating alcohol abuse £2.25b (yup, billion) (2009 figures)
Treating cancer c£5b (I was unable to get a specific figure so far but 18 to 25 billion seems to be the UK costs.)
Arthritis costs £8billion to the Scottish economy.
MS costs £140m

sandyr1
06-Feb-11, 20:30
Danielbrooks "If it seems that I've singled out obesity it is only because compared to other preventable social factors that impact healthcare it is the most prevalent and the one that has the most real financial cost."

Doesn't seem to 'weigh' in with Phill's posting?:

Treating obesity £175m (2%) of the budget (2008 figures)
Treating alcohol abuse £2.25b (yup, billion) (2009 figures)
Treating cancer c£5b (I was unable to get a specific figure so far but 18 to 25 billion seems to be the UK costs.)
Arthritis costs £8billion to the Scottish economy.
MS costs £140m

Perhaps if we treated/spoke of/ discussed/ made a priority of the Obesity first the Cancer would come down by 30% plus.

bekisman
06-Feb-11, 20:32
Danielbrooks "If it seems that I've singled out obesity it is only because compared to other preventable social factors that impact healthcare it is the most prevalent and the one that has the most real financial cost."

Doesn't seem to 'weigh' in with Phill's posting?:

Treating obesity £175m (2%) of the budget (2008 figures)
Treating alcohol abuse £2.25b (yup, billion) (2009 figures)
Treating cancer c£5b (I was unable to get a specific figure so far but 18 to 25 billion seems to be the UK costs.)
Arthritis costs £8billion to the Scottish economy.
MS costs £140m

Perhaps if we treated/spoke of/ discussed/ made a priority of the Obesity first the Cancer would come down by 30% plus.
Bit confused, why underline?

golach
06-Feb-11, 20:40
[/I]
Perhaps if we treated/spoke of/ discussed/ made a priority of the Obesity first the Cancer would come down by 30% plus.

Wow Sandyr, are there no end to your abilities, I bow to your medical knowledge, is it a doctorate or a professorship in medicine that you hold [lol]

sandyr1
06-Feb-11, 20:44
Wow Sandyr, are there no end to your abilities, I bow to your medical knowledge, is it a doctorate or a professorship in medicine that you hold [lol]

If you would care to read above.....like a few posts prior, you would find that I quoted from a London, England Report....called 'Simple Life Changes'.
It appears to be quite legitimate and was prepared by the UK & US......

bekisman
06-Feb-11, 20:49
Might be an idea to sort the lungs out first?
Cancer Type Estimated Deaths
Bladder 14,680
Breast (Female – Male) 39,840
Colon and Rectal 51,370
Endometrial 7,950
Kidney Cancer 11,997
Leukemia 21,840
Lung 157,300
Melanoma 8,700
Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma 20,210
Pancreatic 36,800
Prostate 32,050
Thyroid 1,690
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/commoncancers (http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/commoncancers)

Walter Ego
06-Feb-11, 21:03
Large scale obesity has only become a problem in Britain in the past 20 years-ish.

Yet some would have us believe that the huge leap in weight related problems are something over which we have no control and that it is an inevitable foregone conclusion that most obese people are 'suffering' from some problem. If so, why is it such a recent phenomena? Where are the legions of wobbly-buttocked people on low incomes that should have existed a hundred years ago?


Yes, they're 'suffering'.

'Suffering' from the problem of gorging themselves on food that has never been so cheap or readily available. I know that there are those who have genuine issues, but, for the majority:

Pull the other one. Show some restraint, stop blaming everyone else, stop playing the 'victim' card and most of all - stop eating crap that your body doesn't need.

Phill
06-Feb-11, 22:17
Large scale obesity has only become a problem in Britain in the past 20 years-ish.

Yet some would have us believe that the huge leap in weight related problems are something over which we have no control and that it is an inevitable foregone conclusion that most obese people are 'suffering' from some problem.Well no, not suffering from a problem. It is simple, there are no complex genetic disorders or strange metabolic irregularities in the majority of cases.
Eat less, do more. IT IS THAT SIMPLE. But why is it a growing problem?
Such a simple answer that the US 'diet' industry is worth $45Billion!! And they still have massive obesity problems.


'Suffering' from the problem of gorging themselves on food that has never been so cheap or readily available.So are the supermarkets to blame partly? I went to the Asda's recently and there in the dooorway as I walked in was a huge stand filled with trays of 12 doughnuts for £1.99 or some ridiculous price.


I know that there are those who have genuine issuesWhat are the genuine issues?


Pull the other one. Show some restraint, stop blaming everyone else, stop playing the 'victim' card and most of all - stop eating crap that your body doesn't need.A new one that people haven't heard before!

"complex web of societal and biological factors that have, in recent decades, exposed our inherent human vulnerability to weight gain"

If it's about control and personal responsibility these 7 factors have been identified as those which directly or indirectly affect 'energy balance' i.e. the input (of food) to output (exercise, manual work, mobility). In other words obesity.

1. Biology: an individuals starting point survival advantage of an appetite which exceeds immediate need the influence of genetics and ill health on fat accumulation
2. Activity environment: the influence of the environment on an individual's activity behaviour
3. Physical Activity: the type, frequency and intensity of activities an individual carries out
4. Societal influences: the impact of society
5. Individual psychology: for example a person's individual psychological drive for particular foods and consumption patterns, or physical activity patterns or preferences
6. Food environment: the influence of the food environment on an individual's food choices
7. Food consumption: the quality including energy-density, quantity (portion sizes) and frequency

We can all control all these factors can we?

Walter Ego
06-Feb-11, 22:33
We can all control all these factors can we?

Why shouldn't we be able to?

We all have the ability to exersize free will, haven't we? To eat too much is a choice for many - not a 'problem'.
Is anyone forced to buy those cheap buns you alluded to at Tescos or wherever?

We have more information than ever before regarding healthy diet and the consequences of eating badly - yet we are continually blighted with pictures of bloated kids shovelling crisps and shite down their throats. Why? because doing something positive requires, thought, planning and commitment.

Not strengths we are noted for these days. Go to Asia - or anywhere where western junk food has not swamped the local markets.

And then count how many obese kids there are.

None would be my guess.

Phill
06-Feb-11, 23:06
Child Obesity Threatening Asia, Warns US Expert (http://www.surgeryforobesity.com/Child_Obesity_Threatening_Asia__Warns_US_Expert.ht ml)

Guessed wrong!
(cheap shot, 3rd hit from google and I ain't read it)

So you think we can control our Biology, Activity environment, Physical Activity, Societal influences, Individual psychology, Food environment & Food consumption?


yet we are continually blighted with pictures of bloated kids shovelling crisps and stuff down their throats. Why? because doing something positive requires, thought, planning and commitment.Do you think these kids are exercising free will?
Do you think these kids have read up on all the information about healthy diets?
Are they in control of their Societal influences (peer pressure)?

sandyr1
07-Feb-11, 00:34
BBC Story...just now.
Obesity on a dramatic rise in the UK.....In 10 years obesity rates have doubled.
Costs have soared not only with the new ambulances but also general treatment.
At this time, during a pullback in all costs associated with Health Care this is not welcomed.
Ambulance drivers say the average person's weight has risen from 12/13 stone to approx 18 stone, and it is not unusual to deal with people over 25/28 stone.
This excess weight puts severe pressure not only on the Services but affects people's health!
'Don't blame the messenger'. BBC Doc....

Phill
07-Feb-11, 00:58
Yes we know most of this, some is in the original link from the OP.

What is the answer to these obesity problems. The real answer?
(it's all so easy for those who are the perfect specimen of health and fitness (perfect BMI & muscle tone etc.) to spout the usual line about 'control', 'responsibility' and 'lifestyle choice' to anyone that doesn't appear to fit into their perception of physical beauty. Funny how when someone has lung cancer they don't seem preach to them about their lifestyle choices and control then)


Costs have soared not only with the new ambulances but also general treatment.
At this time, during a pullback in all costs associated with Health Care this is not welcomed.Not welcomed by whom?

Torvaig
07-Feb-11, 01:01
Could one of the factors be that we are now too well off?

There wasn't this scale of obesity in the fifties and sixties. It is only since we have acquired more free money to spend that the problem has become severe.

Years ago we paid the rent/mortgage, basic food, school/work clothes and the occasional ice-cream for a treat in the summer.

A car was a luxury, a holiday was a luxury, a cake was a luxury, chips were unheard of as was frozen foods, soft drinks, a stock of beer/wine/spirits - just look at us now.

No longer do we only eat at meal times or just have a bottle of lemonade on special occasions. There are always crisps, soft drinks etc., available in the cupboard. Many bairns don't drink water these days and neither do adults.

We have treats everyday, problem is they are not treats anymore. They are looked on as necessities.

Portions have become bigger; look at the size of gateaux etc., in coffee shops and hotels. Most families have at least a two course dinner and the plates are made larger so need more on them not to look mean.

Look at how often we eat out.... again, no longer reserved for weddings or birthday parties.

Even breakfasts are now fancy cereals with chocolate, raisins, nuts and goodness knows what else; what's wrong with good old porridge or a boiled egg?

And no, I'm not preaching; I am as guilty as the rest..... I am just pointing out that our lifestyles have changed drastically in the last 30 years or so.

Phill
07-Feb-11, 01:14
Could one of the factors be that we are now too well off?

There wasn't this scale of obesity in the fifties and sixties. It is only since we have acquired more free money to spend that the problem has become severe.

Years ago we paid the rent/mortgage, basic food, school/work clothes and the occasional ice-cream for a treat in the summer.

A car was a luxury, a holiday was a luxury, a cake was a luxury, chips were unheard of as was frozen foods, soft drinks, a stock of beer/wine/spirits - just look at us now.

No longer do we only eat at meal times or just have a bottle of lemonade on special occasions. There are always crisps, soft drinks etc., available in the cupboard. Many bairns don't drink water these days and neither do adults.

We have treats everyday, problem is they are not treats anymore. They are looked on as necessities.

Portions have become bigger; look at the size of gateaux etc., in coffee shops and hotels. Most families have at least a two course dinner and the plates are made larger so need more on them not to look mean.

Look at how often we eat out.... again, no longer reserved for weddings or birthday parties.

Even breakfasts are now fancy cereals with chocolate, raisins, nuts and goodness knows what else; what's wrong with good old porridge or a boiled egg?

And no, I'm not preaching; I am as guilty as the rest..... I am just pointing out that our lifestyles have changed drastically in the last 30 years or so.

Aaaahhh. It seems to me someone is paying attention and thinking about it.
I'd say some of the 7 factors mentioned in posts above have been touched on here.

bekisman
07-Feb-11, 11:04
Could one of the factors be that we are now too well off?

There wasn't this scale of obesity in the fifties and sixties. It is only since we have acquired more free money to spend that the problem has become severe.

Years ago we paid the rent/mortgage, basic food, school/work clothes and the occasional ice-cream for a treat in the summer.

A car was a luxury, a holiday was a luxury, a cake was a luxury, chips were unheard of as was frozen foods, soft drinks, a stock of beer/wine/spirits - just look at us now.

No longer do we only eat at meal times or just have a bottle of lemonade on special occasions. There are always crisps, soft drinks etc., available in the cupboard. Many bairns don't drink water these days and neither do adults.

We have treats everyday, problem is they are not treats anymore. They are looked on as necessities.

Portions have become bigger; look at the size of gateaux etc., in coffee shops and hotels. Most families have at least a two course dinner and the plates are made larger so need more on them not to look mean.

Look at how often we eat out.... again, no longer reserved for weddings or birthday parties.

Even breakfasts are now fancy cereals with chocolate, raisins, nuts and goodness knows what else; what's wrong with good old porridge or a boiled egg?

And no, I'm not preaching; I am as guilty as the rest..... I am just pointing out that our lifestyles have changed drastically in the last 30 years or so.

I've heard old folks say that Britain was at its healthiest during rationing in WWII?

I had by blue ration book and rationing began to end in July 1954 One of the few foods not rationed were fish & chips!

squidge
07-Feb-11, 11:30
Lifestyles have certainly changed. Even doing your shopping used to entail walking down the street, butchers, bakers, greengrocers, and maybe the wee supermarket on The street. When I was first married, even in 1986, I would walk to each of these before getting the bus home. Now I drive to tesco to do everything.

I also think that the lack of ability of young ones to cook is worrying. So many young people have no idea how to make a meal. Schools don't seem to teach it any more and if their mums don't cook then where do they learn from. Breast feeding is important in preventing child obesity too and yet mums in the most deprived areas still either don't do it or stop quickly. Initiatives to improve this are in place ... I'm a bf peer supporter but the help and support tends to be taken up by knowledgeable more affluent parents and not the more deprived families whilst both may need the support, only one is getting it . I'm not sure why that is and I don't believe that enough is done to tackle this.

Fruit and veg can be seen to be expensive and hard to keep fresh. Parents on low incomes are going to shy away from trying stuff that is new because if they mess it up they have lost that money. So they stick to what they know. I am working on a project to tackle some of the foodie issues and try to improve the diet and cooking ability here but more needs to be done.

Phill
07-Feb-11, 14:48
I've heard old folks say that Britain was at its healthiest during rationing in WWII?This quite possibly true. People were growing their own produce more, even grass verges in the streets were turned into mini allotments. Many homes probably had a chicken or two for eggs.


I had by blue ration book and rationing began to end in July 1954 One of the few foods not rationed were fish & chips!But how often could you afford to go to the chippy then? Once a week, once a month.
Even when I was young a chippy tea was a real treat maybe only a handful of times per year. Now we see school kids off to the chippy every dinner time!