CDC says in 2030 42% of Americans will be obese and I say...

bm99

I'm sorry, but 30% of people walking around where I live ARE obese, and I used to be one of them. It is a problem. Manufacturers put high fructose cornsyrup in almost all processed foods. Maybe we could start addressing the problem with that.

Stop buying it. Problem solved and no laws needed.

monty619

I'm sorry, but 30% of people walking around where I live ARE obese, and I used to be one of them. It is a problem. Manufacturers put high fructose cornsyrup in almost all processed foods. Maybe we could start addressing the problem with that.

Stop buying it. Problem solved and no laws needed.

problem is most people DGAF and health care costs go up as do other expenses.

liog

Maybe it's different in the South, but it seems like a large majority of people are obese.

We're not part of the South, but Missouri is one of the fattest states. I found the stat from last year and 66% of Missouri adults are overweight or obese and looking around every day, that figure seems pretty accurate. The CDC's projection does not surprise me. Of course that can always be changed if we choose to change it.

clobercow

Well. All I can say is that I'm working on not being obese. It's NOT that hard.

I know food addiction is real thing. That's a mental health issue though.

If I can cut my daily intake down to 1/3 what it used to be and become more fit. I don't see an excuse for everyone else that is normally healthy.

redcat17

Honestly, I don't get the point of these studies. The American economy makes BILLIONS of dollars a year from obesity-related medications and supplies. Not to mention the $$ pouring in each year to the weight loss industry. I find it hypocritical of these government organizations to perform these studies, pointing fingers at people, when this is the same government that subsidizes unhealthy school lunches and only requires one state to have weekly physical education.

*steps off of my soapbox*

Stay on your soapbox because you are right on target. The drug companies would go crazy if the government so much as lifts one little finger to change things. Not to mention that the government also subsidies the very corn that makes all of the processed food so cheap.

Here in Texas I think the CDC may be right. I was just looking around my building at work today and noticing how may obese people I see there every days.

bm99

I'm sorry, but 30% of people walking around where I live ARE obese, and I used to be one of them. It is a problem. Manufacturers put high fructose cornsyrup in almost all processed foods. Maybe we could start addressing the problem with that.

Stop buying it. Problem solved and no laws needed.

problem is most people DGAF and health care costs go up as do other expenses.

You cant legislate people into caring. You can become an idiot nanny state though.

Sick kids raise health care costs, too. So do old people, smokers, people unfortunate enough to live in highly polluted areas and so on and so on. Thats the price you pay for getting insurance. Do you ever speed? I don't. Thanks for raising my auto insurance prices.

The ONLY thing that will ever work is more nutrition education and old fashioned shame. Scrap so called fat acceptance and stop putting up with excuses and people will change

Brechin89

Insurance companies, and the government is the biggest crooks in the world...

What are they going to do TAX people for taking up too much room? Or eating too much food? Whats it to them, the gov't was funded on the principles of freedom. As it is we don't have enough freedom... I would like to see them tax people for being fat though... Mainly because I find it funny that they would tax themselves. 80% of politics are fat...

If they really want to fix this "problem" why not make Physical Education or Personal Fitness a daily class for every school? Why not open PUBLIC gyms funded by the gov't.. Why not teach kids about nutrition? Why not have a real HEALTH class instead of teaching kids about what bones are in our body and what all the ligaments are called?

BMI is not accurate at all. Guys at the gym can be 5'5 180lbs and be 13% bf.... Does that make them fat?

I wonder if P.E. has changed at all over these years. I never learned to do anything, I was just forced to keep running a track because I was too slow to finish a mile in a set time. Never learned to do any kind of exercise, never learned about nutrition or food. That was years ago, but it doesn't seem to have gotten any better for kids these days.

You weren't forced to do anything. I doubt the teachers reason was because you were too slow to finish a set time. If anything it was because you were out of shape so they were trying to teach you something, no? So you mean to tell me you didn't do any stretching in class? You didn't play any sports/games? Those are exercises right? Nutrition and food should be in health class...

cannonsky

corn subsidies.... that is all

mes1119

do you live in the south? I can say, FOR FACT, that AT LEAST 30 percent of NC is obese.

Maybe I have a skewed view of what is overweight but I still think that a majority of people over the age of 18 are overweight.

Personally, I think the rate of childhood obesity is even more alarming (that can't be skewed by excess muscle mass for the most part).

Oh, and the CDC is the biggest waste of money. They sent out a pamphlet last year for 'zombie preparedness.' definitely don't take anything they say seriously anymore.

and maybe if they stopped funding fast food joints, made is cheaper and more cost effective for farmers or those that grow their own food and stopped mass producing everything and anything we would be better off. But doubtful any of those will ever happen. We might as well hope a zombie apocalypse occurs so that we can kill off all the zombies and start anew with a smaller population. Fact of the matter is there are far too many people on this planet to feed in a healthy manner.

Bevigal

Amen! You know all this genetically modified food that we've been eating for years can not be good for you either. Children born after 1990 have had a steady diet of these enriched foods. All this obesity may not be our fault alone...just sayin!!

patranus

This is America. People are free to choose how to live their lives.
While I choose to live my life in a healthy manner, who am I to judge someone who chooses a different life style.

mamakeke22

my highschool we had to right essays half the time

BrionyTallis

I'm sorry, but 30% of people walking around where I live ARE obese, and I used to be one of them. It is a problem. Manufacturers put high fructose cornsyrup in almost all processed foods. Maybe we could start addressing the problem with that.

Stop buying it. Problem solved and no laws needed.

[ETA: Yep couldn't agree more with this statement. If people do not buy the "bad" foods then companies involved with food will stop selling it, distributing it, producing it. Supply vs. demand. Why do you think more fast food joints are adding fruit, salads and lower calorie versions of their food? It's not because they thought it would be a good idea. It's because market research and their customers told them that they needed to change the menu.]

problem is most people DGAF and health care costs go up as do other expenses.

You cant legislate people into caring. You can become an idiot nanny state though.

Sick kids raise health care costs, too. So do old people, smokers, people unfortunate enough to live in highly polluted areas and so on and so on. Thats the price you pay for getting insurance. Do you ever speed? I don't. Thanks for raising my auto insurance prices.

The ONLY thing that will ever work is more nutrition education and old fashioned shame. Scrap so called fat acceptance and stop putting up with excuses and people will change

I think nutrition education is a good start but I also think food preparation training is another excellent choice. At the risk of citing an example at the extreme but one of my son's friends didn't know how to boil water. He also didn't know how to operate a washing machine and dryer. Apparently these skills were not taught to him in his 19 years of life when I met him.

But I have to disagree with you on the "old fashioned shame". I read a post on another thread where the poster stated she had gained weight as a result of taking prednisone for a lung issue and that was how she gained weight. And what about folks with a food addiction that might require help from the mental health community? Or would you shame the 19 year old in my story above who was never taught these skills?

As I mentioned these are examples in the extreme, but I don't see where shaming helps anyone. I agree that there are people making excuses and even I have done so myself when I wasn't ready to address my weight issue. In fact, I wasn't looking to address my weight issue when I fell ill and started taking a medication that had a side effect of losing weight. I chose to see this as an opportunity to kick start my weight loss program. And I've been learning a lot that I either didn't know or, knew and had forgotten.

Weight loss already has enough emotion in it for some and there is certainly no reason to add such a negative emotion as shame into the mix. Any program that is going to work must be a positive model.

So in theory I have no problem with a "fat tax" if I thought a positive-oriented program containing nutritional education paired with food preparation training or some thing of the like. But let's face it that's not going to happen.

In Arizona, when the "tobacco" money came in it was spent on education, head start programs, health care for pre-school age children and finally a stop smoking campaign with a call center and supplies to help people to quit smoking. There was a a lot of uproar about the money being on non-tobacco related expenses. So what did the State do when the money ran. Put an initiative in front of the voters for a tax hike to continue funding those organizations. The tax rate increase won hands down and this was supposed to get the State out of the red.

But no, I think the governor and the legislator's thought hey we got them to pay before and the tax rate hike is about to expire. Let's see if we can extend the tax rate hike permanently. If we do that then what else can we get people to pay for. Road maintenance, yes, let's get the constituents to pay for road maintenance and these other programs that they voted to save before. So they got some initial feedback that no one liked the idea of a "permanent" tax hike. Okay so will you settle for an 8 year tax rate hike to fund the previous programs and we'll take out the road maintenance. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next legislative session.

And as recently as two weeks ago the State received federal funds to assist homeowners who were having difficulties paying their mortgages or are in the process of foreclosure. Of the $97 million received, the governor lopped $50 million off the top to reimburse the State for helping homeowners over the last 2-3 years. But the feds fired back that the terms for receiving funds did not allow states to be reimbursed for previous expenses. In other words, the full $97 million was to assist homeowners currently have difficulties. It will also be interesting to see how this plays out. But my bet is on the State.

So if those come down to States implementing a fat tax to curb obesity I don't have a whole lot of confidence in my State's ability to implement any kind of true education program.

I suspect however that we will see what happened with cigarette taxes. People stopped buying cigarettes. But at the same time sells for "herbal" alternatives went up and some of those were banned for sell due to health risks. Some buy loose tobacco because its cheaper and roll their own. Now it's e-cigarettes and it is cutting into the tobacco market big time. But those items are not generally taxed because sales tax is not collected at the time of sale and buyers under-report to the State department of revenue. That loophole will probably get closed just like the loophole for collecting tobacco taxes online got closed. However, there are still die hard cigarette smokers out there that continue to smoke cigarettes. And there people who quit smoking. BTW, people who use e-cigarettes no longer consider themselves smokers. It is an area rife for debate because the nicotine is still in an e-cigarette but all of the carcinogenic properties such as tar, smoke, etc are removed. Any way tax revenue from smoking is down. Where are we going to get our tax revenue from in the future?

Ah yes, fat tax ... revenue problem solved. And then will come the substitutes ... people rolling their own pizzas, internet sales of sweet treats, etc.

So yeah the "government" will say it is all about your health and the costs of health care but I don't personally believe it is. It is about getting money into government coffers. The last well (tobacco money) is drying up and it's time to dig a new well.

Kimmer2011

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/05/07/152184370/even-a-small-slowdown-in-obesitys-rise-would-save-big-money

Slowing the rising rates of obesity in this country by just 1 percent a year over the next two decades would slice the costs of health care by $85 billion.

Keep obesity rates where they are now — well below a 33 percent increase that's been expected by some — and the savings would hit nearly $550 billion over the same 20 years.

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/May/05/smoking-offers-lessons-on-fight-against-obesity.aspx

"Obesity is seen as a pejorative term that people don’t connect with. They think ‘I’m just 30 or 40 pounds overweight, but I’m not obese,'" said Dietz of the CDC. That suggests the entire way of talking about the issue may need be reframed before personal and social change becomes possible, he suggested.

Silverkittycat

Come on people, if the CDC and NHANES peeps weren't standing in front of a Walmart store with a McD's right next door the "results" might read differently.
Funny how the definition of obesity changed overnight.

Good luck finding an independent scientist with an open mind and no ties to a food company or advocacy group. Really.

Silverkittycat

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/May/05/smoking-offers-lessons-on-fight-against-obesity.aspx

Not going to read it, sorry. Do you know how many lawyers are working on attacking "big food", and have been for years? Big $ there.

suzan06

I haven't read all the replies so sorry if this was covered already.

My opinion about "what the CDC and government should do about it" is that they should end most/all ag subsidies. Corn adn soy subsidies cause crap like HFCS to be super cheap, and thus it is added to everything (Why the hell are so many foods sweetened? Bc HFCS is cheap!).

I think the disparity in prices (junk is cheap, simple fruits and veggies are pricey) is what has caused the problem, and fixing that is the only thing the government can/should do to fix it.

However, I don't believe they ever actually will fix it. That would be too unpopular for any congressman from a state with ag, which would be.... every state except DC, right?

bm99

Oh, and the CDC is the biggest waste of money. They sent out a pamphlet last year for 'zombie preparedness.' definitely don't take anything they say seriously anymore.

and maybe if they stopped funding fast food joints, made is cheaper and more cost effective for farmers or those that grow their own food and stopped mass producing everything and anything we would be better off. But doubtful any of those will ever happen. We might as well hope a zombie apocalypse occurs so that we can kill off all the zombies and start anew with a smaller population. Fact of the matter is there are far too many people on this planet to feed in a healthy manner.

The CDC sent those out because no one was paying attention to real threats and just expected the government to be there and help them.

You believe we are overpopulated, so you want to MURDER the fat people?

bm99

I'm sorry, but 30% of people walking around where I live ARE obese, and I used to be one of them. It is a problem. Manufacturers put high fructose cornsyrup in almost all processed foods. Maybe we could start addressing the problem with that.

Stop buying it. Problem solved and no laws needed.

[ETA: Yep couldn't agree more with this statement. If people do not buy the "bad" foods then companies involved with food will stop selling it, distributing it, producing it. Supply vs. demand. Why do you think more fast food joints are adding fruit, salads and lower calorie versions of their food? It's not because they thought it would be a good idea. It's because market research and their customers told them that they needed to change the menu.]

problem is most people DGAF and health care costs go up as do other expenses.

You cant legislate people into caring. You can become an idiot nanny state though.

Sick kids raise health care costs, too. So do old people, smokers, people unfortunate enough to live in highly polluted areas and so on and so on. Thats the price you pay for getting insurance. Do you ever speed? I don't. Thanks for raising my auto insurance prices.

The ONLY thing that will ever work is more nutrition education and old fashioned shame. Scrap so called fat acceptance and stop putting up with excuses and people will change

I think nutrition education is a good start but I also think food preparation training is another excellent choice. At the risk of citing an example at the extreme but one of my son's friends didn't know how to boil water. He also didn't know how to operate a washing machine and dryer. Apparently these skills were not taught to him in his 19 years of life when I met him.

But I have to disagree with you on the "old fashioned shame". I read a post on another thread where the poster stated she had gained weight as a result of taking prednisone for a lung issue and that was how she gained weight. And what about folks with a food addiction that might require help from the mental health community? Or would you shame the 19 year old in my story above who was never taught these skills?

As I mentioned these are examples in the extreme, but I don't see where shaming helps anyone. I agree that there are people making excuses and even I have done so myself when I wasn't ready to address my weight issue. In fact, I wasn't looking to address my weight issue when I fell ill and started taking a medication that had a side effect of losing weight. I chose to see this as an opportunity to kick start my weight loss program. And I've been learning a lot that I either didn't know or, knew and had forgotten.

Weight loss already has enough emotion in it for some and there is certainly no reason to add such a negative emotion as shame into the mix. Any program that is going to work must be a positive model.

So in theory I have no problem with a "fat tax" if I thought a positive-oriented program containing nutritional education paired with food preparation training or some thing of the like. But let's face it that's not going to happen.

In Arizona, when the "tobacco" money came in it was spent on education, head start programs, health care for pre-school age children and finally a stop smoking campaign with a call center and supplies to help people to quit smoking. There was a a lot of uproar about the money being on non-tobacco related expenses. So what did the State do when the money ran. Put an initiative in front of the voters for a tax hike to continue funding those organizations. The tax rate increase won hands down and this was supposed to get the State out of the red.

But no, I think the governor and the legislator's thought hey we got them to pay before and the tax rate hike is about to expire. Let's see if we can extend the tax rate hike permanently. If we do that then what else can we get people to pay for. Road maintenance, yes, let's get the constituents to pay for road maintenance and these other programs that they voted to save before. So they got some initial feedback that no one liked the idea of a "permanent" tax hike. Okay so will you settle for an 8 year tax rate hike to fund the previous programs and we'll take out the road maintenance. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next legislative session.

And as recently as two weeks ago the State received federal funds to assist homeowners who were having difficulties paying their mortgages or are in the process of foreclosure. Of the $97 million received, the governor lopped $50 million off the top to reimburse the State for helping homeowners over the last 2-3 years. But the feds fired back that the terms for receiving funds did not allow states to be reimbursed for previous expenses. In other words, the full $97 million was to assist homeowners currently have difficulties. It will also be interesting to see how this plays out. But my bet is on the State.

So if those come down to States implementing a fat tax to curb obesity I don't have a whole lot of confidence in my State's ability to implement any kind of true education program.

I suspect however that we will see what happened with cigarette taxes. People stopped buying cigarettes. But at the same time sells for "herbal" alternatives went up and some of those were banned for sell due to health risks. Some buy loose tobacco because its cheaper and roll their own. Now it's e-cigarettes and it is cutting into the tobacco market big time. But those items are not generally taxed because sales tax is not collected at the time of sale and buyers under-report to the State department of revenue. That loophole will probably get closed just like the loophole for collecting tobacco taxes online got closed. However, there are still die hard cigarette smokers out there that continue to smoke cigarettes. And there people who quit smoking. BTW, people who use e-cigarettes no longer consider themselves smokers. It is an area rife for debate because the nicotine is still in an e-cigarette but all of the carcinogenic properties such as tar, smoke, etc are removed. Any way tax revenue from smoking is down. Where are we going to get our tax revenue from in the future?

Ah yes, fat tax ... revenue problem solved. And then will come the substitutes ... people rolling their own pizzas, internet sales of sweet treats, etc.

So yeah the "government" will say it is all about your health and the costs of health care but I don't personally believe it is. It is about getting money into government coffers. The last well (tobacco money) is drying up and it's time to dig a new well.

It's always sad when someone who ACTUALLY is fat through no fault of their own is made fun of. Remember when there was like one or two fat kids per grade? That's when you could pretty much assume there was something wrong (although people were still horrible).

The more fat is not accepted, the more likely people will teach themselves/their kids about the proper way of eating and staying active. Look at smoking. Right now it is perfectly fine to tell people who smoke that they are disgusting and people are quitting like crazy (even I did!).

ericcumbee

im not for a fat tax, i have a major problem with the Government telling people what they can eat or drink. but what they should do is keep EBT/Foodstamps from being used for stuff like Little Debbie Cakes and Soft Drinks. I have always had an attitude about while i am buying store brand and shopping for the best deal, the people in front of me at the register with food stamps are always buying namebrands, and stuff i wouldn't buy because its way to expensive. its even worse now that i am eating better seeing people buy cookies, chips, cokes, etc and paying with a Peachcard.

i think limiting EBT/Foodstamps to things like meats, cheeses, fruits, vegetables, breads and grains, dairy etc would be a start.

another thing that hacks me off is our local bakery accepts EBT. Now i love this bakery and i dont fault them for wanting to take EBT because money is money. But with the exception of Casseroles at thanksgiving and christmas, 99% percent of what 99% of people buy should qualify for EBT.