Fairweather Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Just do what they did for smokers. For smokers, they showed what smoking did to lungs. Just show what obesity can lead to in the same stark medical terms. Damn straight. Show a pair of lungs with bitch tits hanging off em. Like yours? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Bullshit. People should be charged by the pound. Especially those pregnant people--they are adding to the overall cost anyway. (Discount if they help out all those guys with lactating-MILF fantasys though--stress reliever). nice try, you keep bringing up pregnancy costs. But do you actually believe that the cost of pregnancies (pre-natal care plus delivery costs) in the US even compares to the cost of health care to treat obesity related problems, procedures etc? Do you know how much a friggin' knee-replacement operation costs for example? and let's not forget the CO2 footprint. Fatter people consume more (and expel more waste). At least that hypocrite Al Gore is not a lard-butt and if anything, rising health care costs can NOT be tied to higher pregnancy costs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 all the people here getting all defensive about this notion that fatties would pay extra crack me up. we're not talking about someone who could stand to lose 10, 20, even 30 lbs. that has probably happened to all of us at some point, and could happen again. There are an alarming number of folks in this country who are 50, 100, 150 lbs overweight... and more. there are huge consequences to this life style on all of us. What exactly are these "huge" consequences on all of us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 What exactly are these "huge" consequences on all of us? health care costs and cost of social security to start with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 For everyone else - the fatter they get, the more they should pay for their health insurance. So by that same logic bulimics and anorexics should receive free care? No, I think the logic is that if you are unhealthy in any way, you don't get insurance. Insurance is permitted only for people who don't need it. It would please big business immenseley to enact this change. There's a certain irony in the fact that the word "logic" was incorporated into either post. It's actually kind of flattering when people who can't address an argument intelligently, let alone refute it, elect to respond in this fashion. Bravo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Do you know how much a friggin' knee-replacement operation costs for example? Perhaps it's who I know, but I know more athletes who've required extensive, expensive, knee surgery than morbidly obese. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Do you know how much a friggin' knee-replacement operation costs for example? Perhaps it's who I know, but I know more athletes who've required extensive, expensive, knee surgery than morbidly obese. i don't know any athletes who've had that type of surgery, but lots of obese people who have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Do you know how much a friggin' knee-replacement operation costs for example? Perhaps it's who I know, but I know more athletes who've required extensive, expensive, knee surgery than morbidly obese. If there's one thing that has policymakers and actuaries in a tizzy these days, it's how to contend with the costs associated with paying for all of the knee-repair bills for amateur athletes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 How many people fifteen years younger than you are YOU spongeing off of? You bike commute to work, IN THE DARK and IN THE RAIN!!! You probably have way more chance of being a vegetable on life support for the next 50 years than any of those fatties that you are worrying about paying for. Their biggest risk is dying of a heart attack. Short, sweet, little insurance payout. Insurance is sharing the risk. You are buying the service of not having to worry about going bankrupt due to some illness/injury. Insurance is not about getting lower cost medical care for you and you only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Do you know how much a friggin' knee-replacement operation costs for example? Perhaps it's who I know, but I know more athletes who've required extensive, expensive, knee surgery than morbidly obese. If there's one thing that has policymakers and actuaries in a tizzy these days, it's how to contend with the costs associated with paying for all of the knee-repair bills for amateur athletes. It's actually kind of flattering when people who can't address an argument intelligently, let alone refute it, elect to respond in this fashion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Just do what they did for smokers. For smokers, they showed what smoking did to lungs. Just show what obesity can lead to in the same stark medical terms. Damn straight. Show a pair of lungs with bitch tits hanging off em. Like yours? At least the bitch who owns those tits is standing on top of a mountain (Storm King, in this case). One of many this season. Haven't seen you on top of one lately...er...ever, as a matter of fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 You bike commute to work, IN THE DARK and IN THE RAIN!!! You probably have way more chance of being a vegetable on life support for the next 50 years than any of those fatties that you are worrying about paying for. Their biggest risk is dying of a heart attack. Short, sweet, little insurance payout. Bullshit. Give me numbers. How many cyclists die or are injured every year compared to drivers on our freeways? Normalize it based on participants in said activity if you'd like. And how much does that cost the system? Now compare with the costs of health care for obesity-related care. It's ludicrous to propose that cycling-related injuries are driving up health-care costs. You can do better than that. And face it, what is increasing in this country along with health care costs? Cyclists? Or Obesity? Where do you thing the stronger correlation might be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Just do what they did for smokers. For smokers, they showed what smoking did to lungs. Just show what obesity can lead to in the same stark medical terms. Damn straight. Show a pair of lungs with bitch tits hanging off em. Like yours? At least the bitch who owns those tits is standing on top of a mountain (Storm King, in this case). One of many this season. Haven't seen you on top of one lately...er...ever, as a matter of fact. no reason to get all sensitive, there, chickie... just go buy, discretely through the mail, some of that, errr, "minimizing lingerie"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Just do what they did for smokers. For smokers, they showed what smoking did to lungs. Just show what obesity can lead to in the same stark medical terms. Damn straight. Show a pair of lungs with bitch tits hanging off em. Like yours? looks like someone needs a "manzier" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Bullshit. Give me numbers. How many cyclists die or are injured every year compared to drivers on our freeways? Normalize it based on participants in said activity if you'd like. And how much does that cost the system? So really what you and JayB are saying is you want people to be charged by risk as long as your premiums aren't affected. Typical Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClimbingPanther Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 tvash's got a point about concern over a more invasive society. better take the implications to the n'th degree before advocating something. climbers ought to be the last ones who want a more personalized analysis of risk and cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Do you know how much a friggin' knee-replacement operation costs for example? Perhaps it's who I know, but I know more athletes who've required extensive, expensive, knee surgery than morbidly obese. If there's one thing that has policymakers and actuaries in a tizzy these days, it's how to contend with the costs associated with paying for all of the knee-repair bills for amateur athletes. It's actually kind of flattering when people who can't address an argument intelligently, let alone refute it, elect to respond in this fashion. True - that argument that everyone in the country participating in regular exercise that carries some risk of injury would be far more costly than the the present and future prevalence of obesity had a lot going for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 i mentioned that i hurt myself once when i got off my couch, didn't i?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 True - that argument that everyone in the country participating in regular exercise that carries some risk of injury would be far more costly than the the present and future prevalence of obesity had a lot going for it. I thought we were charging every individual for the risk they incurred? You can stay perfectly healthy with negligible injury risk riding the stationary bike and using the stairmaster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Bullshit. Give me numbers. How many cyclists die or are injured every year compared to drivers on our freeways? Normalize it based on participants in said activity if you'd like. And how much does that cost the system? So really what you and JayB are saying is you want people to be charged by risk as long as your premiums aren't affected. Typical No, what I am saying is I want us to stop pussy-footing around about telling people what they need to hear, rather than want to hear. That's what the thread started out as. And it's hilarious (and case in point) to read all the defensive reaction to that suggestion. As for an extra cost in premium costs, why not? If I am fit, I should pay less, and if I get sick or hurt a lot, well, maybe I should pay more too. Not to say you should be bankrupted by the delta in cost, but something reasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bug Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Obesity is often associated with depression. Depression can be addressed and mitigated in many cases and I am not talking about a pill. I resent obese people who refuse treatment to cure the problem. They insist that it is their right to be fat and then demand special treatment. They get handicapped parking while pregnant women are denied it. Insurance covers transportation costs when their joints collapse. Diabetes is statistically higher by a lot. There is more. I feel really bad for these people but at some point someone who cares, or all of us, need to stop facilitating this so-called disability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No. 13 Baby Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 880s are old skool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 tvash's got a point about concern over a more invasive society. better take the implications to the n'th degree before advocating something. climbers ought to be the last ones who want a more personalized analysis of risk and cost. climbing-related injuries do not and will not ever bankrupt our health care system. but, hey, if some day everyone is so fit and into active, dangerous sports that this becomes a problem we can have that discussion then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 No, what I am saying is I want us to stop pussy-footing around about telling people what they need to hear, rather than want to hear. That's what the thread started out as. And it's hilarious (and case in point) to read all the defensive reaction to that suggestion. As has been pointed out KK, telling people what they "need" to hear often isn't the most effective means of getting them to change their behavior. Which I believe is the subject of this, right? Getting people to change their behavior? Long winded insulting rants whether it be on weight or politics rarely change opinions. They are a nice release though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lizard_brain Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Do you know how much a friggin' knee-replacement operation costs for example? Perhaps it's who I know, but I know more athletes who've required extensive, expensive, knee surgery than morbidly obese. i don't know any athletes who've had that type of surgery, but lots of obese people who have Me too. There have been two just in my office that have had it done. I thought if one of them lost 100 pounds (she was at least that much overweight), I'll bet she wouldn't need the knee surgeries. The other is only about 50 or 60 pounds overweight. (Only.) Imagine carrying around an extra 100 pounds wherever you go! I thought 20 was a lot! She has to do a powerlift every time she gets up from her desk! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.