Obese people may get paid to lose weight

AngryBadger

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7204257.stm


So apparently the morbidly obese will now be paid to lose weight.

Does anyone else feel this is just another step into the mire that is our current "nanny-state" society?

Just so there's no confusion, as far as I'm concerned everyone's entitled to do what they like with their own body. And whatever you decide to do, whether the consequences are positive or negative for your own health and general well-being, it's 100 % YOUR responsibility. So if you're morbidly obese, then it's your job to cut back on the pies and hit the track every once in a while.

I don't think it's very fair that government funds be used to bail people out of a completely avoidable health situation like this.

Come on, it's like rewarding people for being lazy.

P.S. I realise this is a british scheme, but ultimately we tend to follow suit, so I think it bears consideration.

green123

kinda makes sense
save on healthcare costs

Overheal

What happened to survival of the fittest? Why give failed specimens of humanity the opportunity to pass on their flaws?

Might sound vindictive and taboo but honestly thats the truth: why keep someone born with heart problems alive? What will they contribute to the gene pool?

Maximilian

Like they won't spend that money on Big-Macs and Special K...

No, wait, I don't think I meant to say the second one.

johnp

Maybe they should flip it around. Tax people for being obese, or give incentives for not being obese.

Meh, actually, there'd probably be a bunch of lawsuits :rolleyes:

Gillo

Definetly sholdn't be paid to lose weight; I watch what I eat, don't smoke, drink in moderation and work out 5 days a week, surely I should be paid / rewarded for not being a burden on the health service.

[Apart from the consequense's of double posting, I'd be very interesed to restart this thead both in the Fitness and Food forum's (is the the plural?) and see how the two threads develope.]

Gillo

johnp wrote: »

Maybe they should flip it around. Tax people for being obese, or give incentives for not being obese.

Meh, actually, there'd probably be a bunch of lawsuits :rolleyes:

Refit all the courts with narrow doors!!

AngryBadger

green123 wrote: »

kinda makes sense
save on healthcare costs

We'd save even more on healthcare if they just lsot the weight themselves.

I don't want to seem too harsh, but I definitely think there are far more deserving medical demographics that could use this money.

johnp

gillo wrote: »

Refit all the courts with narrow doors!!

gracehopper

green123 wrote: »

kinda makes sense
save on healthcare costs

I agree with the OP. If the government wants to save on healthcare costs why dont they just sack the entire management of the HSE. Non-medical people shouldnt be managing the health system.

Taxpayers shouldnt have to pay for fat camp. end of story!

Ghost Train

well morbidly obese I guess its a good idea

would be better if they could make it into some sort of entertainment gameshow where the morbidly obese fight it out for the prize money

Dragan

Hmmm.....if they bring that in over here and the payments are high enough then maybe i can stop training for a while and atrophy my way all the way to the bank.

Gillo

Or maybe we can set up some sort of scam the pie people get their gym memberships paid for and we buy the membership from them at a reduced price. I like the game show idea, how about putting them on "Takeski's Castle".

18AD

Fat man on the side of the road: Spare some change for the gym.
Model Citizen: No!

He'll just spend it on food.

Wossack

mary harney trying to sneak in another pay rise?

arybvtcw0eolkf

Wossack wrote: »

mary harney trying to sneak in another pay rise?

That deserved to be made bold and bigger (no pun intended)!..

LMAO.

Morlar

Instead of paying them to lose weight why not charge them per pound for being overweight.

Morlar

Offering fat people money to lose weight - you just know they will be straight down the sweet shop with that cash. Then we wil owe them more money when they get fat again. This could turn into a nice little earner.

Donegal Lass

Rofl!!!

Wossack

Wossack wrote: »

mary harney trying to sneak in another pay rise?

Haha excellent. I am annoyed I didn't get that in as I am hardly Morticia's biggest fan. O lads,

You'll LOVE this http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i84/Kag1888/bertie.jpg

Morlar

KaG1888 wrote: »

You'll LOVE this http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i84/Kag1888/bertie.jpg

Thats NSF Anywhere ever.

AngryBadger

KaG1888 wrote: »

Haha excellent. I am annoyed I didn't get that in as I am hardly Morticia's biggest fan. O lads,

You'll LOVE this http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i84/Kag1888/bertie.jpg

Aghghhhhh...just...aghhh...christ, that's brilliant! In a sick, sick kind of way

I am not a drugs man by any means but it'd take all the acid in Amsterdam to get me to go near Mary 'Morticia' Harney. Is her husband related to Ray Charles by any chance?

kittensoft1984

there are some "obese" people who cant help the way they are for medical reasons......so its not fair to tar them all with the same brush.

i wonder what they class as obese?

Dragan

kittensoft1984 wrote: »

there are some "obese" people who cant help the way they are for medical reasons......so its not fair to tar them all with the same brush.

Sorry , nobody hits 350 lbs becasue of a thyroid problem or water rentention.

It's because they eat too much.

EamonnKeane

Maximilian wrote: »

Like they won't spend that money on Big-Macs and Special K...

No, wait, I don't think I meant to say the second one.

Special K is advertised for diets but it's actually not much better than Frosties

AngryBadger

kittensoft1984 wrote: »

there are some "obese" people who cant help the way they are for medical reasons......so its not fair to tar them all with the same brush.

Had this out with someone else on here recently. That's all BS.

There are certain viral infections, and other physiological conditions which cna elad to water retention and faster weight gain than the average. But the bottom line is if you don't eat excessive amounts of food you won't become obese.

So I think it's perfectly fine in this instance to tar them all with the same brush. It's a lifestyle choice,not a mandate.

gracehopper

KaG1888 wrote: »

Haha excellent. I am annoyed I didn't get that in as I am hardly Morticia's biggest fan. O lads,

You'll LOVE this http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i84/Kag1888/bertie.jpg

Ha Ha, thats actually a nice picture of harney!! shes way fatter than that i'd say!!

Tzetze

How about;

MacDonalds/Supermacs/BurgerKing/etc pay for the healthcare of the morbidly obese.

Philip Morris pays for the healthcare (worldwide) of lung cancer/emphysema sufferers.

AngryBadger

Tzetze wrote: »

Philip Morris pays for the healthcare (worldwide) of lung cancer/emphysema sufferers.

Which is also a load of crap and further feeding our current society wide victim-psychosis. If you smoke and get cancer, well ffs, the link is not a big secret!!! If you eat too much and get heart disease...do I even need to finish this?

If you insist on being reckless with your own health at least get some private health cover and don't force the rest of the world to pay for it.

Tzetze

AngryBadger wrote: »

Which is also a load of crap and further feeding our current society wide victim-psychosis. If you smoke and get cancer, well ffs, the link is not a big secret!!! If you eat too much and get heart disease...do I even need to finish this?

If you insist on being reckless with your own health at least get some private health cover and don't force the rest of the world to pay for it.

So, it's fine for those who profit from the deterioration of public health to continue to do so?

AngryBadger

Tzetze wrote: »

So, it's fine for those who profit from the deterioration of public health to continue to do so?

They don't produce something with the express purpose of damaging peoples health. They produce something wich is in demand and in many cases the products in question are accompanied with warnings regarding the effect on your health. Cigarette packs have health warnings in big black letters ona white background. There's any amount of information in the public domain about the effects of irresponsible eating habits, (both in terms of diet quality AND quantity), and on the effects of cigarettes and indeed many other substances, so in my view how informed you are is entirely up to yourself. And if with all that information available to you the decision taken is to continue an activity that is damaging to your health then that's the bed you've made and you may lie in it.

Also, by your argument should the companies producing alcoholic drinks pay for treatment of the various liver conditions consumption of said products is linked to?

Naos

Not to mention the various car companies who should be responsible for reckless driving and thus pay out to any member of the public who is affected in a negative way by a car.

Fat people should not get paid to lose weight. They should be charged for putting on the weight.

Also, narrower doors in courts and mary harney looking for a wage increase: Cracking jokes

nesf

AngryBadger wrote: »

I don't think it's very fair that government funds be used to bail people out of a completely avoidable health situation like this.

Fairness shouldn't be here nor there. If it works out cheaper for the country to pay them some small amount now than pay for the hospitals ten years down the line they should totally do it.

Similar to how the Government should subsidise nicotine patches/Allan Carr's book.

AngryBadger

nesf wrote: »

Fairness shouldn't be here nor there. If it works out cheaper for the country to pay them some small amount now than pay for the hospitals ten years down the line they should totally do it.

Similar to how the Government should subsidise nicotine patches/Allan Carr's book.

Would it not be equally fair to simply withold treatment from people who refuse to meet certain health criteria? This is already done in instances such as organ transplant.

cornbb

If I pay massive amounts of tax and deal with stigma for smoking, I think those who eat their way into hospital should pay their way there too.

Pherekydes

It's a bad idea. They'll simply take the money and not run.

Cuddlesworth

Dragan wrote: »

Sorry , nobody hits 350 lbs becasue of a thyroid problem or water rentention.

It's because they eat too much.

Simple maths

Energy in vs energy out. You eat too much you gain weight.


I would prefer a taxation system for healthcare based on weight relative to height. For example, a obese person would pay a far greater sum then me to fund the HSE every year in taxs. And for the people who say "what about smokers?" They pay an amazing amount of tax's as it is.

Gillo

Dragan wrote: »

Sorry , nobody hits 350 lbs becasue of a thyroid problem or water rentention.

Yes, but those water pies just taste so good:p

A fraction of the money could easily be directed towards health awareness campaigns.

Pepe LeFrits

Getting paid to eat? Niiiiiiiiiiice!

Steyr

Morlar wrote: »

Instead of paying them to lose weight why not charge them per pound for being overweight.

How much per pound??:) They should be forced to exercise. Christ its only a matter of time before we get "fat" coffins like they have in the US, and fatties being Forklifted out of their house through the broken down side wall...

kowloon

UK is going to shlt, maybe they could use their big brother network of cameras to watch peoples diets.
That said, the idea of charging obese people is retarded.
With the social stigma attached to obesity anyone who still eats themselves down a path to an early death does have a medical issue, often a mental health one, something that should be dealt with.
Would you all be out in force pointing fingers at all the sports related injuries that use up taxpayers money? Afterall, they did choose to play.

Maybe a totally private healthcare system would suit you all better?

Perhaps we could have the Gardai enforce a fitness hour :rolleyes:

nesf

AngryBadger wrote: »

Would it not be equally fair to simply withold treatment from people who refuse to meet certain health criteria? This is already done in instances such as organ transplant.

You run into problems with the hippies and their "healthcare for all" propaganda then.

Terry

Overheal wrote: »

What happened to survival of the fittest? Why give failed specimens of humanity the opportunity to pass on their flaws?

Might sound vindictive and taboo but honestly thats the truth: why keep someone born with heart problems alive? What will they contribute to the gene pool?

Yeah!!!
Let's allow people with Lou Gehrig's disease to die too. They're never going to contribute anything to society.

Maximilian wrote: »

Like they won't spend that money on Big-Macs and Special K...

No, wait, I don't think I meant to say the second one.

I eat both as part of a balanced diet.

Slow coach wrote: »

It's a bad idea. They'll simply take the money and not run.

Out of all the 'oh, they're gonna buy junk food' type posts, this was the only funny one.

Did anyone ever think that maybe they will give the money to these people after they lose the weight, or did you all just want to make lame fat jokes, which were not remotely funny?


The medication I'm on causes weight gain.
I gained a stone and a half in the first month of taking it. I was cycling 10 to 15 miles a day at the time, but still gained that weight.
There are plenty of others in the same boat. Of course all the ignorami out there will just label anyone overweight as lazy, without even knowing the cause. And good for you. You should all do it. I once led a shallow life and taking the piss out of others was a great way to make me feel good about myself. I encourage all of you shallow pricks to do the same. It really beats getting over your own insecurities and makes you look cool in front of your friends.

I also suggest ranting about smokers, scumbags, travellers, single mothers, people who drink but don't smoke weed, People who never went to college and earn more than you via the training they got from FAS, the government (even though you didn't vote in the last election because you are too cool for school) and skinny people (because you wish you were skinny, but just can't lose that extra stone and are taking your bitterness out on obese people via the internet).

For the record, I'm obese. I don't want, nor would I accept any money for losing weight. I'd just like to see healthy food that is as cheap as processed crap (which I do not eat).
Oh yeah, I'm also obese because I don't exercise. I know obese people who do exercise and eat properly, but can't get down to their desired weight for a variety of reasons.

rubadub

I must have missed the bit about being paid to lose weight on that link

All I saw was this

Ministers said measures could potentially include offering obese people vouchers for gyms as an incentive to exercise.

Which is going to come from taxpayers money I suppose. I have said before that there shoud be government run gyms all over the place, if they really are any halfway serious about tackling obesity. And at least teach actual physical education is school, not "PE" which translates as runnning around a field for 40mins, I bet some kids dont even know what it is meant to stand for.

There are several playgrounds around my area full of expensive equpiment, good to see kids being active, now could they not put a single simple chinning bar in a public area? dip bars? running track?

Mr Johnson said: "The core of the problem is simple - we eat too much and we do too little exercise. The solution is more complex.

It is simple thermodynamics. If these mythological super efficient humans with ultra slow metabolisms really existed then not all would be fat, some would be able to eat an apple a day and go on a treadmill hooked up to a generator and output power to rival moneypoint. Scientists would be looking for the gene, imagine a farmer that could make massive cows on a normal cows intake.

Massive variations in metabolism do not really exist. I think there was a thread that did mention one medical condition that lead to overeating. But it was not defying thermodynamics like some people like to think they can do, they were still overeating.

As you get older your metabolism slows down, you need less energy to survive. People value this in cars, but think it terrible if their own body becomes more efficient. You have to change accordingly. If you put on fat it is since you ingested more calories than you need, simple as that. If you are on medication and find you are putting on fat, then adjust your fuel intake accordingly, it is easy enough to calculate.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=50956807&postcount=4

Say you have drive 50miles a week to work and usually put in 2 gallons of petrol a week. Now say you go to the garage and the mechanic says "your tyres are not pumped up fully, that makes the car less efficient". Now you pump them up. The mechanic has increased your efficiency. Now if you put in 2 gallons everyweek your tank will eventually start to overflow.

If your metabolism is slowed, be it by getting older, decreased muscle mass, decreased weight, medication, less activity etc,- then if you continue to put as much fuel in your system then your gut will overflow your pants in the exact same way. Eating less is the simple answer, you might not like it, and I am not saying it is easy but it is the simple truth.

I know obese people who do exercise and eat properly, but can't get down to their desired weight for a variety of reasons.

Could you define "eat properly"? especially regarding portion/calorie amounts taken in and calorie expenditure?

There was a documentary on a while ago with a doctor talking of a morbidly obese patient who could not figure out he was fat as he ate "healthy food", his favourite was oranges, 35-40 a day....

AngryBadger

kowloon wrote: »

Maybe a totally private healthcare system would suit you all better?

Actually I'd be all for that. Then everyone is responsible for their own healthcare, and private healthcare can only be an improvement on the current health system in Ireland.

Re: Sports injuries:

If you play sports you will probably get injured at some stage, but this is not a guarantee, and the morbidity of the injury and level of medical treatment required doesn't comapre with what you're talking about to treat someone with life-threatening weight levels. Plus someone playing sport isn't partaking with the cure knowledge that they're going to wind up injured and in need of significant medical care, whereas someone who's piling on the pounds and making no effort to lose them is a dead cert for a colourful diversity of conditions.

My point is that if someone is obese then their health problems are generally a result of them being unwilling to take responsibility for their own diet and exercise regime. Whereas if someone injures themselves playing a sport it's comparable to someone injuring themselves while walking to work, it's not the result of them capulating on their responsibility to their own health.

Also, I realise there are situations where people can't avoid weight gain, people convalescing is a common example, women who've jsut given brith, and people on certain medications. But these are by far and away the exceptions, in the majority of cases it's donw to a lack of personal discipline. End of story.

AngryBadger

Terry wrote: »

I also suggest ranting about smokers, scumbags, travellers, single mothers, people who drink but don't smoke weed, People who never went to college and earn more than you via the training they got from FAS, the government (even though you didn't vote in the last election because you are too cool for school) and skinny people (because you wish you were skinny, but just can't lose that extra stone and are taking your bitterness out on obese people via the internet).

I'm not really seeing the relevance of this?

My point is that I consider it ridiculous that there should be a government funded incentive for obese people to lose weight because I think it's just another example of people famring out their responsibility for themselves to the government.

I'm not endorsing the notion that people with various conditions, acquired or congenital should have treatment withheld, but I definitely believe that in a situation of limited resources, (and we're always in a situation of limited resources), whatever is available should be distributed according to those with the greatest need and the highest likelihood of a positive response to treatment. As I said before this is already practiced in numerous medical situations such as organ transplant, and certain classes of surgery.

But you feel free to make spurious emotional arguments that don't reflect the facts or what I'm saying. It adds to the debate

Terry

AngryBadger wrote: »

But you feel free to make spurious emotional arguments that don't reflect the facts or what I'm saying. It adds to the debate

Thanks. Drunken rants are great.

Sugar Drunk

This has got to be a joke? It reminds me of the time when extra vision cleared all charges for people who owed them money. So they rewarded the people who couldnt be arsed paying their fees and what did the rest of us who always paid our acciounts get - nothing!! This is what hapopens when you let a fat mess like nmary harney act out the role of health minister.

Why should obese people get paid money???? Its those of use who look after our bodies and who are less likely to encur medical bills that should get tax breaks. Tax the obese people - less money means they can buy less food. the tax can be used to pay for their heart disease treatment, their gastric band fitting and their saggy skin removal afterwards.

I dont buy the excuses that these people come out with - anyone who gets to the stage of being morbidly obese brought it on themselves it doesnt just magically happen. I can never ever understand how peiople can allow them selves to get to that stage - there has got to be a point when these people just stop givign a damn about themslves. As for the medication/not being well excuse I have severe back problems but I excercise as much as I can and watch my diet so that I don't become overweight its not that hard. Its time for people and magazines to stop using the word 'curvy' to describe people who are overweight - a size 20 is not curvy its overweight and it needs to vbe stressed that thi sis not heaklthy before we have more and more obesity problems

Its just starting to really p*ss me off that in this society we just keep throwing money and incentives at the people that do not do the right thing - this idea for one and the idea of giving money to badly behaved teenagers, houses to pregnant teenagers and benefits left right and centre. Its the people who look after their health, dont become obese or pregnant at 12 or a heroin addict end up paying for all of this out of our hard earned cash!!

Are we going to end up like the UK? Saw an article in a UK magazine - a woman who was obese demanded a free gastric band to lose weight. She got it free and lost the weight and was then moaning about havign to wait for a free operation to remove the excess saggy fat. FFS it was her own fault she got to that size in the first place and she was moaning that the NHS were not sorting her our free of charge fast enough!

bill_ashmount

Overheal wrote: »

What happened to survival of the fittest? Why give failed specimens of humanity the opportunity to pass on their flaws?

Might sound vindictive and taboo but honestly thats the truth: why keep someone born with heart problems alive? What will they contribute to the gene pool?

Twat

BlitzKrieg

I am so very confused by this thread?

Did anyone here actually read the article?