Send fat people to slimming classes

bumper234

So in the UK they are saying that Obese/overweight people should be sent to slimming classes on the NHS. As someone who put on a **** load of weight when i gave up smoking and then had a shoulder injury i know how quickly you can go from fit to fat.

I have now dropped from 225lbs to 195lbs and work out 4 days a week because i enjoy it but should/could overweight/obese people eventually be FORCED to exercise? No one is suggesting this at the moment but will it go that way one day?

Obese and overweight people should be sent to slimming clubs on the NHS, according to official new guidance.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) advice says sending people on "lifestyle weight management programmes" will save the health service money.

While acknowledging there is "no magic bullet" to the "complex" problem, the guidance says the 64% of the population classed as obese or overweight can enjoy significant health benefits by losing as little as 3% of their weight.

desultory

Lost a considerable amount of weight myself(Practically a small man) and nice to see it's being put on the NHS to remove yet another excuse for actually exercising.


Still, it should only become compulsory if they're a drain on the system with health issues.

Michael D Not Higgins

Junk food tax. It'll generate money for the country rather than increase spending.

Celly Smunt

They should check the structural integrity of the class locations anyway, too many fat people on one floor is bound to cause a collapse.

Super-Rush

Another fat person bashing thread?

Enough is enough.........





















said no fat person ever.

desultory

Super-Rush wrote: »

Another fat person bashing thread?

Enough is enough.........





















said no fat person ever.

Oh that caught me off guard, brilliant

Celly Smunt

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Junk food tax. It'll generate money for the country rather than increase spending.

Junk food doesn't automatically make you fat though, excess junk food does.A skinny bastard like myself shouldn't suffer for a fatty's lack of discipline.

SEPT 23 1989

We are moving further on from the Nanny State into something much darker

Toto Wolfcastle

It won't work anyway. People have to want to lose weight in order for it to happen. Although I suppose if people drop even a few pounds it will help, and some people will do well.

Nidgeweasel

Rightly so. Get them into exercise programmes and ban them from public transport and planes.

When you are respectable size then you can re-join society and fly again.

mike65

Has anyone ever really sought to discover why the people who are overweight became overweight in the first instance? People bang on about mental will, sugar, fat and lack of exercise but many of us are not overweight and have no trouble maintaining an appropriate weight.

Mr. CooL ICE

Celly Smunt wrote: »

They should check the structural integrity of the class locations anyway, too many fat people on one floor is bound to cause a collapse.

BOOM

Jawgap

Yes.

The NHS is brilliant but it means people are not faced with the consequences of their lifestyle choices.

Healthcare provision should be free at the point of delivery (for everyone) but that shouldn't absolve you from taking on a certain amount of responsibility for your own health.

Iang87

definitely wont work. as someone who is in the process of losing weight believe me you simply have to want to do it. If you're forced you'll just find ways to cheat and eat whatever you like. How do they plan on controlling them outside the classes. Slap a calorie counting tag on them that shocks you when you go over 2500 a day

Nidgeweasel

Jawgap wrote: »

Yes.

The NHS is brilliant but it means people are not faced with the consequences of their lifestyle choices.

Healthcare provision should be free at the point of delivery (for everyone) but that shouldn't absolve you from taking on a certain amount of responsibility for your own health.

ITV ran one of those fat programmes maybe a year ago. Year to save my life or something of that ilk.

One particular portly chap was on a controlled diet in hospital to lose enough wait to be safely operated on for a balloon treatment.

He ended up gaining weight, In hospital. On a controlled diet.

Long story short, he'd been snacking off the trolley.:D Begs the question why there'd be a tuck shop lady pushing a trolley round a ward with people on a controlled diet. Probably with a fan on the top wafting the smell of her freshly baked pies into the wards.

Talk about good product placement. Should be on dragons den.

Michael D Not Higgins

Celly Smunt wrote: »

Junk food doesn't automatically make you fat though, excess junk food does.A skinny bastard like myself shouldn't suffer for a fatty's lack of discipline.

We suffer alcohol excise duty and plenty of other taxes due to the use and abuse of others, why not junk food/sugar/whatever?

In order to combat preventable deaths, society has introduced vaccine programs, increasing cigarette duties, etc. Why shouldn't we focus on the number one, heart disease? Granted, there are several causal factors for heart disease but two of the big ones are diet and exercise. We can't force people to exercise, and we can't force them to eat healthily, but we can at least encourage it financially.

Dravokivich

Sounds too simple. All you are doing is trying to manage the results of the issues people have had, without dealing what got them there. There's a huge list of reasons why people end up in such condition, being lazy is only one of'em.

Taxing junk food, or the main junky ingredients to junk food isn't the answer, because again it's just focusing managing on the result and becomes an extra income for the Government without actually doing anything.

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

(1) We suffer alcohol excise duty and plenty of other taxes due to the use and abuse of others, why not junk food/sugar/whatever?

In order to combat preventable deaths, (2) society has introduced vaccine programs, (3) increasing cigarette duties, etc. Why shouldn't we focus on the number one, heart disease? Granted, there are several causal factors for heart disease but two of the big ones are diet and exercise. We can't force people to exercise, and we can't force them to eat healthily, but we can at least encourage it financially.

1- We do? The tax is high because the government know people will put the blame towards the pubs that they go too. It's what most of the threads here regarding pub prices are focused on.

2 - Well, yeah

3 - Not, the same thing, up there with my earlier comment. A lot of people who I've noticed complaining about the price of cigarettes have done so towards the shop keeper. I saw an enormous amount of it when I used to work in a newsagent.

Never heard of "the old reliables" when it comes around to budget time, with taxes being marked out for Alcohol, Cigarettes and Petrol?

I suppose they keep Petrol high to encourage us to walk more?

Toto Wolfcastle

I don't believe a tax on junk food will stop people buying it. There will always be cheaper alternatives.

Miseryguts

Simple tax the people who are over a certain weight?

desultory

Miseryguts wrote: »

Simple tax the people who are over a certain weight?

What about bodybuilders?
or anyone that's even slightly more muscular than what's considered 'normal'

Jawgap

Bobblehead Panda wrote: »

I don't believe a tax on junk food will stop people buying it. There will always be cheaper alternatives.

plus how do you tax it?

the food is not inherently unhealthy, it's the quantities (and frequency with which it is eaten) that are the problem.

Miseryguts

desultory wrote: »

What about bodybuilders?
or anyone that's even slightly more muscular than what's considered 'normal'

I don't know maybe have some body fat to muscle ratio? It's hard to imagine body builders eating excess junk food anyway.

alchemist33

Pay them to lose weight. Seriously.

ash23

The problem with the notion of forcing people to exercise is that when you're very overweight, a non weight bearing exercise is really the best, healthiest option. Swimming pools cost money.

If you've a bad knee/back/shoulder etc, walking or impact exercise isn't going to be suitable for you, at least initially. Who is going to want to exercise when it is painful or potentially physically damaging to do so?

Personally I think that giving gym/pool membership instead of slimming classes would be better. Most slimming classes are pretty gimmicky and not really sustainable.

I've MS and put on a couple of stone since diagnosis between comfort eating and steroid treatment. I can't do impact exercise as I've nerve damage in my spine which affects my right leg. Even a brisk stroll makes my spidey senses tingle (as in I get really bad pins and needles up and down my leg).

I looked into local gym membership and it was way too expensive considering I only wanted to use the pool. Even to swim three times a week is going to cost the guts of €30. There are special offers for OAPs but I'm not that old yet.

Ho-hum. I don't like being fat and I try to lose weight on diet alone but it's not easy when you're pretty inactive.

Jawgap

Nidgeweasel wrote: »

ITV ran one of those fat programmes maybe a year ago. Year to save my life or something of that ilk.

One particular portly chap was on a controlled diet in hospital to lose enough wait to be safely operated on for a balloon treatment.

He ended up gaining weight, In hospital. On a controlled diet.

Long story short, he'd been snacking off the trolley.:D Begs the question why there'd be a tuck shop lady pushing a trolley round a ward with people on a controlled diet. Probably with a fan on the top wafting the smell of her freshly baked pies into the wards.

Talk about good product placement. Should be on dragons den.

So are you suggesting that the trolley should be done away with? Or that it was the hospital's 'fault'?

How about they just tell the trolley lady not to serve him or have her record who buys what?

No need to punish everyone because one person can't control their urges.

bumper234

mike65 wrote: »

Has anyone ever really sought to discover why the people who are overweight became overweight in the first instance? People bang on about mental will, sugar, fat and lack of exercise but many of us are not overweight and have no trouble maintaining an appropriate weight.

For me it was pure laziness. Started eating ****e and the portions got bigger

desultory

alchemist33 wrote: »

Pay them to lose weight. Seriously.

Obesity epidemic to grow exponentially overnight followed by fitness fanatics in one years time.

Dravokivich

Miseryguts wrote: »

I don't know maybe have some body fat to muscle ratio? It's hard to imagine body builders eating excess junk food anyway.

The only way to accurately get such a ratio is through a very expensive Scanning process. You'll lose more money then claim in tax. Every other method can yield different results done by different people which is easily open to challenging.

Nidgeweasel

Jawgap wrote: »

So are you suggesting that the trolley should be done away with? Or that it was the hospital's 'fault'?

How about they just tell the trolley lady not to serve him or have her record who buys what?

No need to punish everyone because one person can't control their urges.

I was being facetious. It humoured me. He denied everything of course and then came clean in a big teary outpouring of emotion.

In terms of fault?

The gluttonous cretin who is morbidly obese in hospital to lose weight shouldn't really be packing chocolate should he. On the other hand the trolley shouldn't be tempting them.

Michael D Not Higgins

Dravokivich wrote: »

Sounds too simple. All you are doing is trying to manage the results of the issues people have had, without dealing what got them there. There's a huge list of reasons why people end up in such condition, being lazy is only one of'em.

Taxing junk food, or the main junky ingredients to junk food isn't the answer, because again it's just focusing managing on the result and becomes an extra income for the Government without actually doing anything.



1- We do? The tax is high because the government know people will put the blame towards the pubs that they go too. It's what most of the threads here regarding pub prices are focused on.

2 - Well, yeah

3 - Not, the same thing, up there with my earlier comment. A lot of people who I've noticed complaining about the price of cigarettes have done so towards the shop keeper. I saw an enormous amount of it when I used to work in a newsagent.

Never heard of "the old reliables" when it comes around to budget time, with taxes being marked out for Alcohol, Cigarettes and Petrol?

I suppose they keep Petrol high to encourage us to walk more?

I've honestly never seen people complain to shopkeepers about cigarette prices. The pub prices are due to the fact that people have never run a pub business and don't know the cost of overheads, which is strange as sometimes these same people don't see a problem with paying a restaurant multiples of what they'd pay in a supermarket for the same ingredients.

Sure, they're old reliables, but that's because it's a steady income for the government. Day in, day out, people are buying alcohol, cigarettes and petrol.

So do you agree with the NHS proposal? Would you prefer that in Ireland? Or do you have a better solution?

Edit: the comment on petrol is a strawman. I never implied all taxes were for the benefit of our health or to reduce the usage of something.

FTA69

Iang87 wrote: »

Slap a calorie counting tag on them that shocks you when you go over 2500 a day

Patent pending.