[Closed] Obese? "Exercise or We'll Cut Your Benefits" - Tory Council Plan.

he is living proof of that
FACT

he is being sarcastic [ as am I] for in reality he is fat and rich

Am I getting a synopsis or not?

I'm relatively poor (by STW standards) and incredibly lazy and I've just eaten my own bodyweight in Chinese takeaway..

are they going to stop our working family tax credits..?

tories are not nice
will pickles go on a diet?

if your fat its your fault [society has not helped by the removal of access to sporting facilities and the free availability of fast foods- some more tory bashing - lets tackle that to]
to do sports costs money
No it does not my bike is free
no you had to buy it

yes but its fats people own fault

order may not be correct jist is

Thanks Junkyard.

I would've read it all but i'm too busy lying on the couch stuffing my face with ice cream.

You saved yourself a headache then! Not a bad summary from JY, but he missed two cracking early jokes (from different perspectives) about leisure wear. They made the thread, especially the very witty retort about rugger shirts and cricket jumpers. Very drole!

Mmmmm....pickles!

[img] [/img]

In my area the facilities are there to help people lose weight.

My wife went on a weight loss scheme,free pedometer and a weekly check provided by the local health authority.
She was given a minimum amount to walk per day,which she easily exceeded.Her diet was also looked at every week.There was nothing complicated.
She lost about a stone,felt fitter and permanently changed her eating habits.
The thing is the advisor said that my wife was exceptional amongst the people she saw.Some handed back the pedometers as they never walk anywhere and others didn't change one thing in their diet.
She can go to the local council gym and swimming pool for just £17 a month,and no we're not on benefits.
Maybe these opportunities are not available in other areas but here its brought to you on a plate (so to speak ).

I'd just point out that its likely that we haven't evolved much, which is to say that there is no significant genetic difference between you and your ancestor of 60,000 yrs ago.

Surely a major change in diet would be likely to accelerate evolution? After all almost every human race has evolved in the last 50'000 years. If evolution can produce such visible changes then there is likely to be other changes for example the way tolerance to alcohol has evolved in some populations but not others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_tolerance

I'd think it likely humans have evolved in response to a grain diet over 10'000 or more years.

We should do this with MP and minister salaries... How much could we take away from Ken Clarke?

I remember as a teenager my 2 years younger sister put on a bit of weight - we are from a very sporty and active family and I remember my mum sending her to extra athletics and dance sessions, plus cutting pocket money so she couldn't buy sweets etc at school.

IMO that's responsible parenting. Sadly we now have a victim culture where it's always someone else's fault rather than a lack of personal responsibility.

Replace payments with direct rent payments and food vouchers that can't be used for fags, booze or ready meals/junk food and you'd sort this. Harsh, but if they won't take responsibility for themselves, someone else should.

adults are allowed to make bad choices whether you [or their parents]like it.

Why are only those on benefits getting your tough love?

Why are only those on benefits getting your tough love?

....because they're using tax payers money to get fat?

...and others are using it to get high, drive cars, read books, buy flowers or paint their halls. Do you have a complete list of do's and dont's?

to be fair, fatties should be treated with same disdain and horror as 4x4 drivers by the greens. Stuff the health or benefits argument. They are grossly over consuming resources that have a massive carbon footprint. Sorry, but a large scale macerator and direct injection into a EFW plant like we do with cow carcass is the only way they can pay back some of the energy debt.

or stick fins on them and sell them to the Japanese as new type of landwhale for hunting.

I remember my mum sending her to extra athletics and dance sessions

Hmm.. that kind of parenting could work, but it could cause a hell of a lot of problems.

I remember my mum sending her to extra athletics and dance sessions

Ever heard of "Ugly Parent Syndrome"?

[i]Surely a major change in diet would be likely to accelerate evolution? After all almost every human race has evolved in the last 50'000 years. If evolution can produce such visible changes then there is likely to be other changes for example the way tolerance to alcohol has evolved in some populations but not others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_tolerance

[b]I'd think it likely humans have evolved in response to a grain diet over 10'000 or more years.[/b] [/i]

Professor Cordain seems to think grains aren't much of a good thing.
I don't want to argue about it. Each to their own.
🙂

[i]adults are allowed to make bad choices[/i]

I'd say yes to that, upto the point that someone else's lifestyle choice, effects me. A type of honouring your responsibility to your community sort of thing.

People have been getting obese for a long time now. You can't blame any one political party!

Mass production of processed foods and the bare fact that food is relatively cheap now means that most people have become accustomed to eating far too much, especially convenience food.

Unfortunately it's the least well educated people who don't know when to put the brakes on. Have they not got a mirror? Do they not feel how bad it is to be obese? I can understand being overweight, but just don't get how people get to 20-30-40 stones. Some top out at 70 stones. Who is feeding them? It isn't them because that can't even get out of their houses.

Something has to be done about it. My view is that we should educate people and encourage consumption of more homemade fayre. The outlawing of certain types of food would help.

Penalising people who have got to this sorry state is harsh, but if claimants are able to get this big whilst being supported by the state, the benefits they are getting are probably too great! So I believe it's a fair policy, but as ever, pounced upon the loony left, who'll have anyone who is perceived to be in a disadvantaged situation, who is not taking any personal responsibility for themselves, feeling like they are victims.

Remember the saying "there is nowt for nowt"

I'd say yes to that, upto the point that someone else's lifestyle choice, effects me.

Like those silly mountain bikers whose lifestyle choice costs you valuable NHS money...?

She can go to the local council gym and swimming pool for just £17 a month,and no we're not on benefits.

Blimey, wish our council leisure centre was that cheap - its £35 per month if you do a 6 month contract, and £50 per month with no contract. It's around the same price as the private gyms - the swimming pool is a lot bigger, but it's also freezing, crowded, and full of manky plasters. 🙁

[i]Unfortunately it's the least well educated people who don't know when to put the brakes on. Have they not got a mirror? Do they not feel how bad it is to be obese? I can understand being overweight, but just don't get how people get to 20-30-40 stones. Some top out at 70 stones. Who is feeding them? It isn't them because that can't even get out of their houses.[/i]

Quite a loaded paragraph there. It just isn't as easy as [b]telling[/b] someone to eat less. The body has a will of its own and if its signals become compromised, then excessive weight gain does occur.
As for the higher weights you mention, at this stage people are usually suffering Metabolic syndrome in which case, your body definately isn't functioning correctly and body fat regulation and storage are not working correctly.

[i]Like those silly mountain bikers whose lifestyle choice costs you valuable NHS money...? [/i]
A crude and clummsy attempt at Trolling which requires no more response than this.

Blimey, wish our council leisure centre was that cheap - its £35 per month if you do a 6 month contract, and £50 per month with no contract. It's around the same price as the private gyms - the swimming pool is a lot bigger, but it's also freezing, crowded, and full of manky plasters.

£30 here, with £20 sign up. No contract.

I want £17.50 access 🙁

Who is feeding them? It isn't them because that can't even get out of their houses.

Graham your bmi mortality graph, was just wondering are anorexic/bulemic and other people who are skinny/malnourished through a medical condition included in the skinnies? and are these statistically relevant and should they be included? I can see how obesity on it's own could be classed as a medical condition, dunno tho. is it fair to compare them?

How will your local council know that your doctor had perscribed excercise? And how could they know that once you'd clocked in at the gym you'd actually used the facilities?

Of course it's easy to kick the poor but harder to solve the difficult problems of society, so kick the poor again...

Like those silly mountain bikers whose lifestyle choice costs you valuable NHS money...?
A crude and clummsy attempt at Trolling which requires no more response than this.

Interesting. I wonder what the cost of cycling related injury is compared to that of obesity. I'd hazard a guess that it's a lot closer than you might imagine.

I saw one stat for the US which claimed a cost of $4bn/yr for cycling related injury.

Graham your bmi mortality grah, was just wondering are anorexic/bulemic and other people who are skinny/malnourished through some medical condition included in the skinnies? and are these statistically relevant and should they be included? I can see how obesity on it's own could be classed as a medical condition, dunno tho. is it fair to compare the two?

In many cases I expect obesity to be as linked to mental problems as being skinny, I think it shows your own preconceptions and conditioning to think that one side of the graph should be treated differently from the other.

[i]I can see how obesity on it's own could be classed as a medical condition, dunno tho[/i]

Only after lobbying by Big pharma gets Govs to class obesity as a [i]disease[/i], for obvious reasons.

I saw one stat for the US which claimed a cost of $4bn/yr for cycling related injury.

[i]I saw one stat for the US which claimed a cost of $4bn/yr for cycling related injury[/i]

Whats that ?, high costs in the land of litigation. Oh, go on with you 😉

In many cases I expect obesity to be as linked to mental problems as being skinny,

Only after lobbying by Big pharma gets Govs to class obesity as a disease, [b]for obvious reasons.[/b]

It kills people?

[i]It kills people?

[/i]

I think you know what I was getting at, Jamie.
Big pharma lobby Gov to class something as [i]disease[/i] so that then GSK or whomever can make money selling drugs to combat said [i]disease[/i]. Providing a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place. imo.

Interesting. I wonder what the cost of cycling related injury is compared to that of obesity. I'd hazard a guess that it's a lot closer than you might imagine.

I saw one stat for the US which claimed a cost of $4bn/yr for cycling related injury.

I saw one [url= http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-consequences/economic/ ]stat[/url] which claimed 190bn a year obesity costs for the USA.

I'd guess the mountain bikers on this forum have a higher than average injury rate. Utility cycling or touring is not much riskier than walking though. Nobody says there is a problem with walking related health costs. I've managed to cycle for decades without any injuries needing medical attention - a mix of commuting, touring, mountain biking, and everyday journeys.

Oh yeah - forgot to query this one:

[img] [/img]

Does that graph include people who are underweight because they have some other terrible disease which kills them?

I've managed to cycle for decades without any injuries needing medical attention - a mix of commuting, touring, mountain biking, and everyday journeys

Haven't read the other pages but humans getting 'bigger' isn't going to end well and is going to cost loads. Unfortunately those on benefits get tough love because they don't earn the money to make the choice to eat more etc so 'we' can have a say in what they do because 'we' pay for it but the message of eat healthily and exercise needs to be given to all and encouraged. I like the idea of higher taxes on sweets/fast food/processed foods and the planners could start by allowing less of the Maccy D's of this world to populate our high streets in place of 'real' shops or food outlets serving 'home cooked' produce.

Fwiw I'd back needing insurance for high risk sports injuries like mtbing, rugby etc but that's a whole other can of low fat worms.

I wonder how you would feel about people on benefit being given a say in how you lived your life?

JY.

Are you alright ?, I think you need to calm down mate.
Perhaps you've had too much forum time ?.

I wonder how you would feel about people on benefit being given a say in how you lived your life?

I wonder how you would feel about people on benefit being given a say in how you lived your life?

But the bugs we are facing are our own ruling classes...

I'd guess the mountain bikers on this forum have a higher than average injury rate.

Maybe. Maybe not. Bit of a wild assumption really.

I've MTB'd for 20 years, never required NHS resources for any injury.

In fact, nobody in my family has ever ended up in hospital because of a hobby-related injury.

My sister on the other hand, who has never engaged in any risky or contact sport/activity in her life, has ended up in A&E on numerous occasions.

None of us are obese either. Whatever that's got to do with it.

But the bugs we are facing are our own ruling classes...

...but the weapons are the...erm...hmm...nope..analogy gone.

Edit: Who are you talking to, Junkyard?

But the bugs we are facing are our own ruling classes...

I'd guess the mountain bikers on this forum have a higher than average injury rate.

5 a side football on the other hand, that's bloody dangerous that is.

All this talk of demonising food, is making my pain au chocolat sad 🙁

[img] [/img]

About access to exercise - someone mentioned swimming, and that it wasn't free. That's a particular bugbear of mine - in the past, swimming in summer was often free, done in lakes and rivers. But since th"n, masses of signs have gone up saying no swimming, and apart from a very few spots, swimming is officially banned in most of the previously popular places. For example, both where I grew up, and where I live currently, there are riverside parks that used to have swimming stages in the river, and now have big no swimming signs. There's also been a massive cultural change against outdoor swimming - there are still kids jumping in rivers off rope swings in places, but nothing like the massive groups you see in old photos of the same places.

On the other hand, there is also the growing evidence that what fat people do in terms of healthy eating, exercise etc should be targeted at just having a healthy lifestyle, rather than at losing weight as such, as a fat person with a healthy lifestyle may be equally healthy to a thin person with a similar lifestyle, whereas losing weight by dieting has been associated with poor health outcomes in the long term (and is very rarely successful). Looking at that evidence, whilst targeting fat people and encouraging them to live healthy lifestyles may be useful, a high priority should be put on preventative measures to stop people becoming fat, like eductaing people about food, restricting or at least informatively labelling unhealthy foods, restricting advertising of junk foods to kids (and restricting the use of tv tie ins on food items like Thomas Yoghurts etc.),. oh and trying to remove or reduce social, financial and legal barriers to exercise.

Spongebob - Member
Penalising people who have got to this sorry state is harsh, but if claimants are able to get this big whilst being supported by the state, the benefits they are getting are probably too great!

Flawless logic.

So I believe it's a fair policy, but as ever, pounced upon the loony left, who'll have anyone who is perceived to be in a disadvantaged situation, who is not taking any personal responsibility for themselves, feeling like they are victims.

Bleurgh.

> Like those silly mountain bikers whose lifestyle choice costs you valuable NHS money...?
A crude and clummsy attempt at Trolling which requires no more response than this.

It's not a troll - it's a valid counter.

You see obesity as a lifestyle choice that is affecting you (by costing you tax money presumably) - but mountain biking and other "dangerous sports" also cost us NHS money. So does smoking, driving, drinking, DIY etc etc

Picking on one unhealthy lifestyle choice is a very slippery slope in my opinion.

Fwiw I'd back needing insurance for high risk sports injuries like mtbing, rugby etc but that's a whole other can of low fat worms.

I'm not sure that making good exercise more expensive and more hassle is the best way to solve an obesity crisis.

And again, what about other "high risk" activities? A lot more people end up in A&E through DIY accidents or drinking than they do from mtbing - so should they need insurance too?

Does that graph include ...

That graph is from [url= http://www.ucalgary.ca/familymedicine/obesity ]here[/url] which abstracts it from:
Adams KF, Schatzkin A, Harris TB, Kipnis V, Mouw T, Ballard-Barbash R, Hollenbeck A, Leitzmann MF. Overweight, obesity and mortality in a large prospective cohort of persons 50 to 71 years old. N Engl J Med 2006; 355:763-778.

But it was really just the first clear one I found on Google. It is probably a little exaggerated as the sample group was older people (50 to 71). But there are quite a few studies that show very similar trends across populations - such as the meta study I mentioned showing 6% lower mortality in overweight people. Search for "mortality bmi" or similar and you'll see what I mean. Note that many of the mortality graphs focus on being fat and don't show the underweight section (BMI 18.5 or lower)

And it's not [i]just[/i] because underweight people are sick, though I'm sure that is a factor. For example this graph shows the relative risk (RR) of Cardiovascular Disease:

[img] [/img]
[url= http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2006/08/22/bmi-is-not-a-good-predictor-of/ ]source[/url]

[i]You see obesity as a lifestyle choice [/i]

No, obesity is the result of the body storing too much fat.

[i]by costing you tax money presumably[/i]

So there you're just [i]putting words into my mouth[/i].
Thanks.

I'm not sure I need reply any further. You seem to be arguing with me, on my behalf, all on your own. Enjoy.

Just spoke to my sister about this to try and get a balanced view (and yeah, teenage years done, she is pleased mum kept an eye on what she ate in those formative years and stopped a problem developing :-))

She's a physio who gets a lot of GP referrals as well as private clients.

Estimate is that something like 50% of her work is "poor lifestyle" related GP referrals (hip & knee work for obese people is a particularly high proportion), 25% occupational health/work related injury, with the remaining 25% being sports injury/rehab etc. And around 50% of the sports injury related clients are self funded.

What I would draw from this is that we have a clear breakdown of proportionality of cost, from just one very small stream of healthcare provision, and it's obvious that poor lifestyle and obesity related illness is costing the NHS and in turn the taxpayer a disproportionate amount of money. So yes, something should definitely be done to take a "prevention" line rather than "cure" - and if people won't do it for themselves, someone should do it for them. Whether that's benefits in restricted food vouchers or something else, there must be a solution to take away the opportunity to make a poor choice, as they clearly show they can't make the right choices themselves, yet expect the country to pick up the tab.

> You see obesity as a lifestyle choice

No, obesity is the result of the body storing too much fat.

> by costing you tax money presumably

So there you're just putting words into my mouth.
Thanks.

Apologies I've clearly misunderstood what you said. 😳

What did you mean by [i]"I'd say yes to that, upto the point that someone else's lifestyle choice, effects me. A type of honouring your responsibility to your community sort of thing. "[/i] ?

I read that to mean that obesity is a [i]lifestyle choice[/i] that other people make which [i]affects you[/i]? (I [i]presumed[/i] financially, but maybe you just can't find trousers in your size any more?)

You seem to be arguing with me, on my behalf, all on your own. Enjoy.

No I'm not.

Yes you are.

Note that many of the mortality graphs focus on being fat and don't show the underweight section

While I'd see over eating in a similar vein to anorexia/bulemia, psychological/body image/depression etc, creeping obesity (which i thought was a large part of the obesity epidemic) seems a bit different, lifestyle issues rather than medical condition.

Yeah I'd agree with that D0NK.

It's been discussed that the unemployed should be made to work for their benefits, cleaning streets or whatever. That sounds right-wing.

However, you could do the same thing but call them state supplied jobs and it'd be a left wing idea, wouldn't it?

Anyway, you could make those jobs something active like mowing the grass at schools etc. Two birds one stone.

NB this post is for argument use only and does not represent the personally held views of molgrips.

[i]Fwiw I'd back needing insurance for high risk sports injuries like mtbing, rugby etc but that's a whole other can of low fat worms.[/i]

I'm not sure that making good exercise more expensive and more hassle is the best way to solve an obesity crisis.

The expense would be a consequence of an attempt at consistent financial responsibility. There is plenty of free exercise out there if someone wanted it - walking, jogging, dancing, bending over to touch your toes to mention just a few.

Creeping obesity is a nice phrase, like someone side earlier it's a combination of factors but it still needs addressing.

I'm ALL for working at least a few hours for your benefits too, can't see a down side to it at all.

Graham.

Sorry if my post wasn't as clear as it could have been.

It was a general point I was making [b]in context[/b] to a post by Junkyard.

What I was trying to say is that I don't have a problem with what people do with their body weight, until or unless it effects me personally.

I don't believe obesity is a lifestyle choice for 99% of those who qualify as obese (yes I have met a few people who claim to be very happy with them being very over weight).

IMO, obesity is a result, of a body in which excess fat storage has taken hold and normal body fat regulation systems / processes have been down regulated or compromised. I feel that it is rooted in a lack of education combined with the agenda of food manufacturers. Although that is probably an over simplified view on the [i]issues[/i].

EDIT.

I'm off now, so if I don't return. Have a good weekend, y'all.
😉

"The fat, thin, elderly, young, weak, poor, sick, those with or without pets and anyone who reads anything, particularly facts, are the "root of all problems", said someone in Parliament somewhere today. The government announced that these would be the targets of their new policies to lower the debt or perhaps deficit - depending on which week it is and what they said last time - for 2013.

According to a party spokesperson there are two major factors for this fresh, new stance. Firstly they are taking into consideration that absolutely none of their plans to kick-start the economy have worked so far and they have no other ideas. Secondly they've looked at the way that countries such as Iceland and now even the US are gradually clawing their way back into the international market, and have decided to ignore their tactics as that would be too sensible and no way as fun as "just killing off the population".

Obese people are the first to be targeted because, as the Health Secretary said "they are easy targets on account of there being more to fire at. Harder to miss you see? Why can't I just shoot them? Who makes these bloody laws anyway?"

Anyone whose BMI scale is higher than that of any of the athletes who won gold shiny things at the Olympics, will be forced to go to the gym or have their benefits cut. The hope is that without benefits these 'money gulpers' will have less money to be able to afford to eat decent and healthy food, therefore increasing their size rapidly and dying of heart attacks before the welfare system has to deal with their ungrateful selves.

The think tank study into this suggests that their "whale-like carcasses can be used to burn as fuel for our fancy cars and jet planes or to create more soylent green than the average impoverished orphan. This could then feed several impoverished orphans at once so they can work in factories longer."

Next up are the elderly who the government suggest that it's best to just "freeze back into work". The Department of Health, working alongside the Department of Work and Pensions on this area of debt reduction say that by taking away winter fuel allowance elderly people will be more inclined to go out and work in order to stay warm via movement and heaters in the workplace.

"Should all go to plan", said another spokesperson to the one earlier, "their homes will be too cold to return to, and they'll have to stay at work all night. Then we can repossess their flats and house and sell them to millionaires to keep those whacking great truffles in". Calling it the 'Work To Live, Until You Die As You Haven't Long Left' scheme, or WTLUYDAYHLL for short, it's hoped that this will save the government tens of pounds. Ultimately this'll mean they can definitely continue to ignore any tax not coming in from huge companies that take them to lunch, as they really do like lunch.

All this should ensure that taxpayers money is not spent on those who "suck the life out of the tax system like poverty tramp leeches, disgusting, disgusting poor people. Urgh, urgh I feel sick thinking about them" and rather on increasing minister's salaries along a higher rate than the 121% increase they've had in the last five years. The Secretary For Work and Pensions aims to change his job title to Lord of The Strong, Damner Of The Weak and Pathetic to highlight exactly what he has to deal with. He said: "I just don't understand why these people feel they should have anything ever. We've taken away lots of jobs and now they are complaining they can't get jobs. Well, I think it's as though they aren't even trying to get the jobs that we've made sure aren't there. And if they aren't trying, then why on earth should they be allowed to eat, or stay warm, or get around or just generally not die?"

Changing their slogan to 'The Party for People Who Hate People Who Aren't Their Friends' they are hoping this new 'honest' face will increase votes in 2015. Or at least kill off anyone who might vote against them. Over the next six months its rumoured all houses without working chimneys will have them restored so children can sweep them for sixpence and 'stop trying to learn anything, the bloody skivers' while plans to use disabled people as speed bumps in roads are still being discussed.

The PM stated: "Look we can't just splash money on an Olympics and Jubilee every year so we've just given up trying to pretend we think you deserve to be even remotely happy. Unless someone comes up with a better idea you'll just have to knuckle down and accept 2013 is going to be crap for everyone that is too lazy to afford to go on a skiing holiday."