Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

What new or revised public policy/law would make it easier for people to maintain a healthy weight?

1568101128

Replies

  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    FireOpalCO wrote: »
    Single payer healthcare, including nurse visits and dietitians.
    32 hour workweek.
    Investment in mass transit systems over highways
    Longer school day with mandatory % of time in recess/PE/sports
    Tax breaks for companies that buy desk bikes/treadmills, provide a cafeteria, or pay for gym memberships or onsite doctor visits, transit cards, bike racks, etc.
    Increase the percentage of open space, bike trails, etc. in development codes.
    Building codes that require open staircases under a certain story height? (People are more likely to use the stairs if they are big and visible vs. hidden behind a door looking like they're for emergencies only.)

    To add to this (because it's more or less what I was thinking), better bike infrastructure (this, for me, goes beyond "bike trails") and an overhaul on school lunch programs.

    Tax breaks for bike commuting. For people who are putting less wear and tear on the roads, and not using up parking spaces - which people get into knife fights over.

    You already get a tax break by not paying motor fuel taxes since not buying gas for bike commutimg.

    lol wut

    Not paying a tax on an item I'm not consuming isn't a tax break. I could say you're getting a tax break by not buying marijuana in Colorado or Washington, that would be just as nonsense.

    You are getting bike paths and roads paid for in large part by motor fuel taxes and not contributing.

    What? I'm about to hit 100,000 miles on my Subaru. It runs on gas just like your car, and they tax mine too.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,961 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    FireOpalCO wrote: »
    Single payer healthcare, including nurse visits and dietitians.
    32 hour workweek.
    Investment in mass transit systems over highways
    Longer school day with mandatory % of time in recess/PE/sports
    Tax breaks for companies that buy desk bikes/treadmills, provide a cafeteria, or pay for gym memberships or onsite doctor visits, transit cards, bike racks, etc.
    Increase the percentage of open space, bike trails, etc. in development codes.
    Building codes that require open staircases under a certain story height? (People are more likely to use the stairs if they are big and visible vs. hidden behind a door looking like they're for emergencies only.)

    To add to this (because it's more or less what I was thinking), better bike infrastructure (this, for me, goes beyond "bike trails") and an overhaul on school lunch programs.

    Tax breaks for bike commuting. For people who are putting less wear and tear on the roads, and not using up parking spaces - which people get into knife fights over.

    You already get a tax break by not paying motor fuel taxes since not buying gas for bike commutimg.

    lol wut

    Not paying a tax on an item I'm not consuming isn't a tax break. I could say you're getting a tax break by not buying marijuana in Colorado or Washington, that would be just as nonsense.

    You use the road when you're on your bike, and taxes on motor fuels support the building and maintenance of roads. Why should other people have to pay higher gas taxes to pay for your use of the roads?
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,961 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    aokoye wrote: »
    FireOpalCO wrote: »
    Single payer healthcare, including nurse visits and dietitians.
    32 hour workweek.
    Investment in mass transit systems over highways
    Longer school day with mandatory % of time in recess/PE/sports
    Tax breaks for companies that buy desk bikes/treadmills, provide a cafeteria, or pay for gym memberships or onsite doctor visits, transit cards, bike racks, etc.
    Increase the percentage of open space, bike trails, etc. in development codes.
    Building codes that require open staircases under a certain story height? (People are more likely to use the stairs if they are big and visible vs. hidden behind a door looking like they're for emergencies only.)

    To add to this (because it's more or less what I was thinking), better bike infrastructure (this, for me, goes beyond "bike trails") and an overhaul on school lunch programs.

    Tax breaks for bike commuting. For people who are putting less wear and tear on the roads, and not using up parking spaces - which people get into knife fights over.

    You already get a tax break by not paying motor fuel taxes since not buying gas for bike commutimg.

    lol wut

    Not paying a tax on an item I'm not consuming isn't a tax break. I could say you're getting a tax break by not buying marijuana in Colorado or Washington, that would be just as nonsense.

    You are getting bike paths and roads paid for in large part by motor fuel taxes and not contributing.

    What? I'm about to hit 100,000 miles on my Subaru. It runs on gas just like your car, and they tax mine too.

    That's irrelevant. It's like saying, "Why should I have to pay income tax? I pay sales tax and property, just like everybody else." The fuel taxes we're talking about are rough proxies for use of the roads and wear and tear on the roads, because the costs of setting up tolling gates and weighing stations at every ingress and egress to public roads and every jurisdictional line (at a minimum) are deemed higher than the costs of the inaccuracies in using consumption of motor fuels as a proxy for road use.
  • BuiltLikeAPeep
    BuiltLikeAPeep Posts: 94 Member
    I think health insurance companies should be made to offer free or discounted gym memberships. My husband is on disability, so he gets free Medicare, which offers free gym memberships. However, I am paying through the nose for health insurance at work just for myself, and the only weight loss they pay for is either prescription pills, which I am scared of because most turn out to be dangerous for your heart, or gastric bypass, which, by the time I lose the required weight they make you lose to "prove" you're serious, I will not need. It makes no sense to me. I know that gastric bypass is by no means the "easy" way out, but it seems that my insurance company is only willing to pay for "quick" fixes.
  • nathanellsworth
    nathanellsworth Posts: 10 Member
    Not sure if this was mentioned yet, but when discussing adding requirements for labeling calories and nutrition information on menu items or any other food for that matter, the FDA only requires labels to be within 20% of what is actually in the food, so the labeling could be pretty inaccurate.

    https://www.fda.gov/food/guidanceregulation/guidancedocumentsregulatoryinformation/labelingnutrition/ucm063113.htm

    Also, if you are using a device to track your fitness (Apple Watch/Fitbit, etc...) it is prudent to note that the energy expenditure calculations can be way off... on average 27%, and at worst 93%.

    https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2017/05/fitness-trackers-accurately-measure-heart-rate-but-not-calories-burned.html

    So, regardless of labels being provided on food, your calorie calculations could be off by a ton of calories if including labels and energy expenditure.

    I think awareness is far more important than any legislation that restricts a person's freedom of choice.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Also, if you are using a device to track your fitness (Apple Watch/Fitbit, etc...) it is prudent to note that the energy expenditure calculations can be way off... on average 27%, and at worst 93%.

    https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2017/05/fitness-trackers-accurately-measure-heart-rate-but-not-calories-burned.html

    Bear in mind the referenced studies have all used the devices incorrectly for allowing the normal improvement to calculating calories burned.
    Like tweaking stride length for the daily step aspect, or learning resting HR and workout frequency to improve the workout calorie calc's.

    They strap the devices on a for a study period there in the lab for some tests and that's it. The researchers didn't do their research on how they work to setup a good study.
  • Theoldguy1
    Theoldguy1 Posts: 2,454 Member
    I think health insurance companies should be made to offer free or discounted gym memberships. My husband is on disability, so he gets free Medicare, which offers free gym memberships. However, I am paying through the nose for health insurance at work just for myself, and the only weight loss they pay for is either prescription pills, which I am scared of because most turn out to be dangerous for your heart, or gastric bypass, which, by the time I lose the required weight they make you lose to "prove" you're serious, I will not need. It makes no sense to me. I know that gastric bypass is by no means the "easy" way out, but it seems that my insurance company is only willing to pay for "quick" fixes.

    And the $x a month for membership is included in your premium. Ain't nothing free.

    Just buy the membership of you want it. A