nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Should there be an obesity tax?

Relax brah

Overweight people consume more and are more unhealthy requiring greater medical resources - we seen this during covid with death rates correlating to overweight individuals.

An obesity tax should be considered or their health premium should at least be 3/4x higher

Discuss

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119723386#Comment_119723386

Perfect? I can't find any article saying it's actually achieved anything. Also it's not a compulsory law in Japan. Though it gets erroneously reported that it is.

One of the reasons given for increasing obesity in Japan is a shift to processed food diet, increase in sedentary lifestyle partly due to long working hours.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119724249#Comment_119724249

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119724410#Comment_119724410

That's a bit like saying death is usually the result of dying. As if no one understand that.

Marty Bird

I’d agree that for some obese people it can be down to a medical reason,

but the vast majority of overweight people it’s down to pure overconsumption of crap food and zero physical activity.

This country needs to go down the Japan route ASAP, look around I’ve never in my lifetime seen so many fat people that’s the pandemic this country is seeing unfold day by day.

One can only imagine the pressures these people will eventually put on put on our shîte health service.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119725803#Comment_119725803

Primarily the over consumption. It might even be the same volume of food its just more calorie dense these days.

We know the how. The question is why. How do you influence food choices and people behaviour.

TomTomTim

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119724410#Comment_119724410

Exactly, it's a very convenient way to get around doing anything about the issue. Discipline only seems hard when you're completly lacking any.

3 or 4 hours of exercise a week, and not eating over 2,500 calories a day, will fix most peoples problem, likely even those with medical issues.

Greyfox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119724410#Comment_119724410

Well in my opinion I think it's your attitude that's wrong. Raising the price of unhealthy food isn't going to stop people who are addicted to eating crap, it's the wrong way to deal with the issue.

Greyfox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119727402#Comment_119727402

Surgery foods are, they give a dopamine hit. During experiments with rodents its shown to have effects similar to drugs. Now I'll be honest, Surgary treats are not as addictive as drugs, some people though find quitting sugar for them to be as hard as quitting alcohol or smoking.

Greyfox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119727904#Comment_119727904

It's not an excuse, it's simply one of the reasons why many are overweight.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722659#Comment_119722659

generally, the ones most likely to screach about personal responsibility, are the least likely to actually practice it in my personal experience.

i suspect that may be the experience of others, hence some get touchy as you suggest.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119725803#Comment_119725803

the japan route doesn't work.

it might look from the outside like it does but all data shows it's not the case as the problem is rising there as well.

when they brought in the law they had among the lowest rate in the world.

Larbre34

Its an odd attitude, dismissing people's ailments as a legitimate excuse to be unable to exercise, just to feel superior about your own life.

Yes, some of those ailments may be a direct result of overeating and underexercising, but they are where they are like, its not like their situation can be set aside to facilitate a radical (for them) exercise regime.

waterwelly

What about cashback for weight loss?

It would need an algorithm to stop people binge eating and binge dieting, so a multi year formulae.

No payment until after maybe 6 months, then a payment to maintain your weight loss, and an annual bonus for further weight loss etc.

Paid for by higher sugar tax.

gary550

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728304#Comment_119728304

I was speaking with someone with a media background a good while ago and operation transformation (and in general programs about overweight people) came up. He mentioned that it was such a hit and shows like that generally are a hit because the majority of people can sit at home and enjoy watching it because it makes them feel good about themselves and superior to people they may feel are subordinate to them because they are fat. A bit like a parade of the fatties for everyone else's amusement.

Now I'm sure alongside that type of viewer there are also overweight people who it may inspire to change or health or fitness enthusiasts who like that type of program or people who have feck all else to watch but there probably is a fair chunk of viewership that probably watch that just to be amused by someone else's plight.

Relax brah

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119723020#Comment_119723020

Thank you. Perfect example

Larbre34

Its only humiliation if they feel humiliated. If they find value in the programme they are assigned and end up feeling better about themselves, then its hardly humiliation.

Besides, jokes on you, they get the services of a personal trainer, dietician and psychologist free gratis for two months. Wouldn't they be foolish not to take advantage of it.

gary550

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728750#Comment_119728750

Because for a lot of people I'm sure they felt they have exhausted their will power and want the emotional support, access to pts and dieticians and accountability that shows like that can offer. Maybe the tradeoff of being paraded on national television is worth it for them? Maybe they want pity? some people do.

Still stands the point, the success of shows like that depends a lot on the viewership of people who will feel superior when they watch others struggle.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119705634#Comment_119705634

Yeah exercise burns less fat directly than many people think. Though there are knock on effects like the fact that even at rest muscle tissue burns over double the calories that fat tissue does.

But the effects of exercise on weight loss are - as you suspected in your post above - much more far reaching than merely the calories burned by the exercise or the resulting muscle tissue.

As you said - the people are engaging in something more meaningful and time consuming. So the time spent sitting around - where snacking might come into play - is reduced.

But there are other effects too. The positive endorphins of exercise can reduce anxiety and undermine the other things that make people seek "comfort" in food. Time invested in exercise has value people do not want to undermine with bad food so they are more motivated towards good food.

The pride and awareness that comes with setting physical goals and hitting them can positively impact peoples food choices. When you become someone who actively pursues exercise it can leave a more "positive self image" which is a motivator to allow the implications of that image to permeate other areas of our lives.

Setting aside time for exercise can have effects on routine - and routine can be a powerful promoter of eating and preparing food well - and counter impulse and convenience options. Anecdotally I have seen poor diets and eating habits correlate very heavily with no discipline or routine around eating.

Meanwhile the brain fog or low energy and motivation caused by bad food can keep people in a bad cycle of food choices. A fog that can be lifted by the positivity of exercise and help people break out of that bad cycle. When someone is in a bad cycle - there are often multiple places to break the chain.

And finally for some people - we find that when we ask more of our body it asks more of us. I find the harder I push my body the less inclined it is to crave crap food - and call for better. When I ask more of my body - it tends to crave better and more nutritious food.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728463#Comment_119728463

It's not if you did the research.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119727402#Comment_119727402

What "science"

https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/eating-disorders/binge-eating-disorder/mental-health-food-addiction#:~:text=Like%20addictive%20drugs%2C%20highly%20palatable,the%20need%20to%20eat%20again.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728403#Comment_119728403

I see it's been a constant criticism of that show.

This thread is much the same. Condidering the disproved theories people are trotting out.

https://m.sundayworld.com/lifestyle/nutritionist-calls-for-fat-shaming-operation-transformation-to-be-scrapped/40003058.html

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/fat-shaming-makes-things-worse

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119733112#Comment_119733112

I agree that sport and exercise have a lot of benefits. Even for mental health. Routine also has benefits.

Some people find doing exercise makes them over eat. As they are hungrier. So it takes education and discipline to eat properly with exercise.

You might be drawn to eat better foods, I like salads for example but not everyone is the same.

This thread for some is about an inability to recognize people are different and chastising then for that difference. Not everything that works for you will work for them.

The challenge is finding different things that work for different people. If it was easy as has been suggested it wouldn't be a problem throughout the developed world.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119733305#Comment_119733305

Indeed - the problem is very often that different things work for different people. This is a problem we often see when people compare diets for example. Quite often - especially on line - with a lot of vitriol. Especially, for whatever reason, when Veganism in particular is one of the diets under discussion.

But the simple fact is that a diet that works for one will completely fail to work for someone else. I learned this all too well myself when I spent quite an extended period of time trying different diets to find the one that works for me. People swore to me Veganism was the way to go. Or Vegetarianism. Or High fat low carb. Or low fat high carb. Another was the "carnivore" diet of almost total meat. And so on.

I tried them all. Some had little to no benefit. Some absolutely tanked my well physical and emotional well being at every level (particularly veganism - that destroyed me on every level, no energy, no concentration, no sexual libido or prowess, nothing).

In the end what worked for me was what I jokingly call "The Rainbow diet". Which is basically that I try to vary my diet as completely as possible both within any given meal and over time. Each meal has to be as varied as possible. But any meal I have I try to not have again for as long as possible. So I am simply giving my body everything, as varied and diverse as possible, and let it sort it out as it sees fit. And this has been the diet that has peaked me on any level I could measure it on from physical to emotional to sexual to mental.

What also does not help in conversations like this thread is the appeals to extremes or outliers. Despite the fact that different things work for different people - I still think there is a useful core discussion to have about what works and/or is generally true for the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time. But threads like this one tend not to get much further than the first page before someone is talking about people with "medical conditions" that leave them unable to lose weight, or cause them to retain water as fat and so on.

Exceptions should not negate general discussion or good policy. We can have a useful discussion about obesity, diet, and exercise over a general population despite people having outlier medical conditions - in just the same way as we can have a generalized population level discussion about sexual health and well being and education without going "Oh but what about the pedophiles?".

Flinty997

Outliers just disprove a sweeping generalisation.

[Deleted User]

Not so sure I would phrase it that way really - but I know what you mean.

For example you could make the perfectly valid generalization that a certain snake bite kills people. Because it pretty much always does. But there could be some small number of people who have self micro-dosed - in increasing quantities - the venom in particular. To the point that if that snake bites them now, they do not die.

But the generalisation still holds despite that exception - and a general conversation targeted at a general population about safety around that snake can still be had and is useful to have.

So too can I discuss how nuts are healthy and a good food. That generalization is true despite the fact that for some thankfully small number of people - said nuts are almost instantly lethal.

So when it comes to conversation and discussing general policy it pays to be cognizant of - and empathetic towards - the outliers and exceptions for sure. However I feel people can be tempted to go too far and act as if those exceptions negate any utitlity in having such policy or such conversations in the first place.

Flinty997

If you were writing a computer system you have to allow for the outliers. Most people have a mobile. But not everyone so you need to do things differently for them. Someone might be homeless, have no fixed way of contact.

If something was simple it could be solved simply. That it hasn't, strongly suggests it's not simple at all. Some can't grasp that. It's like trying to explain a phobia (or mental health issue) to someone who doesn't have it. Or hasn't heard of it.

[Deleted User]

Indeed. As I said a general conversation can be had - but it should be had while being cognizant of, and empathetic towards the outliers and exceptions. So I think we are saying the same thing in different ways.

What I watch out for though is anyone who suggests explicitly or implicitly that the outliers and exceptions render general conversation and policy somehow null.

So I think a general conversation about obesity can be had, and the fact that for most people most of the time not being obese or losing weight when they are obese is a good goal. Not leading a sedentary lifestyle is usually a good goal.

But as we can see on threads like this it is not long before someone makes a kind of "What about the people who have some underlying issue that means X is massively difficulty if not impossible for them?".

Yes we absolutely should discuss such people and do what we can for them. But they do not nullify in any way the general conversation about a general population. So it's a move I think is worth being wary of and watchful for. If someone brings up such people it is worth pausing to be clear why they are doing so - and what their point actually is.

Flinty997

You're fixating on "underlying health issues"

I not talking about that at all. I'm saying just because something works for 50% of people doesn't mean it will work for the other 50%.

Whereas your saying because it works for 50% of people it will work for the other 50%. But that's not always true even if it's often true.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119733742#Comment_119733742

I can only speak for myself here. The reason I mention underlying psychological issues in relation to obesity is because some people claim that it's easy to lose weight. It's important to be able to see that side of the debate as well. I also understand that there are those who can't be bothered as well as those who struggle.

It isn't a 'move' and I don't understand the need to be wary. In fact it's the single-minded among us who set my alarm bells off.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119733803#Comment_119733803

Unfortunately the final sentence of your post here does not actually in any way describe what I have been saying, no. I never said anything remotely similar to that at all in fact. So there has been a communication mismatch somewhere in the conversation here which would be worth flagging and fixing.

The only thing I have been saying is that while having general conversations about a general population - we should be aware of the exceptions and try to account for them. What we should not do however is allow those exceptions to negatively impact that conversation or policy.

Nothing in that position is remotely similar in even the smallest way to saying "If something works for 50% it will automatically work for the other 50%". I am highlighting the fixation of other people to things like "underlying health issues" therefore - rather than as you put it - being fixated on them myself.

Let me use your own analogy as that might help. You said "Most people have a mobile. But not everyone". So because mobile penetration is so high we could for example have a useful conversation as a society about implementing a mobile based E-Voting system for our democracy. During that conversation we should absolutely say things like "But how do we account for and include people who have no Mobile?". What we absolutely should never say or even hint at is "There are some people without mobiles therefore this entire idea is a bad one".

In my experience - which is anecdotal of course so take it as such - whenever a conversation starts on a forum like this about obsesity and how losing weight is a healthy and good goal - someone will bring up things like those people with "underlying health issues". And rightly so. Those people need to be included. But it is how, why, and to what end they are being included I think we always need to invest some attention to and be hyper aware of.

To that end -

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119733819#Comment_119733819

- this would be kinda what I am saying too. It is indeed important to see it from the side of people who have for whatever reason or reasons an issue with pursuing such goals. But if those reasons are statistical outliers we should absolutely acknowledge them and account for them - but not in a way that impinges our ability to have a general conversation about general ideas and policy over a general population.

In other words I think both conversations can and should be had - without any negative impact on each other. They are not mutually exclusive.

I suspect the motivation of people who make posts and threads like the OP - comes more because of those as you put it who "are those who can't be bothered".

While I might not share the OPs opinions and motivations and positions on this topic I can at least understand where they may be coming from when they are paying ever increasing medical insurance payments and the like in a society where there exists some number of people who take absolutely no ownership of their own health and then simply create a burden on that medical system.

I am not the OP and do not at all have the same bee in my bonnet on the subject - but I can at least empathize with the head space they are likely coming from.

I absolutely refuse to evangelize healthy living or healthy diets or preach to people on those topics. I do however try to represent those lifestyles well and example them well. I talk about my personal choices and the positive effects they have had on me. And I do it often. But never in a "therefore you should do it too" kind of way.

If people look at me - and many in my social circles have - and come to me openly asking me about it then I am happy to advise and guide. But I have no interest in preaching at people - or taxing them like the OP suggests!

Like you I am quite wary of the sweeping statements of "It is easy to lose weight" though. It very often isn't even without underlying conditions. In fact I recently was reading studies which suggest that if you lose 10kg - then put that 10kg on again - and then try to lose it again - it actually takes much more effort the second time around. It seemingly literally becomes more difficult to lose weight that you had previously lost and then regained. I never followed up on reading those studies to see if they were replicated. But if true it is certainly something we should be aware of before preaching at people that it is all so easy!

And sometimes weight loss makes no sense. It certainly can be more nuanced than the people who reduce it to little more than "Calories in - Calories out". For example anecdotally I had a friend who had serious trouble losing weight and tried all kinds of diets. After many failures with nothing working he came to me. I looked at his diet and changed nothing except _ when _ he was eating the things he was eating. He was essentially eating the same types of things but at different times of the day. I moved for example his most carb heavy meals to early breakfast rather than late dinner. And I compressed the time window during which he was eating (essentially a 16 hour fasting structure). And the weight fell off him.

No change in calorie intake. No increase or decrease. But yet the impact on his weight was significant. It makes no sense to me or to him. We just know it worked.

As Flinty rightly says - if it was easy everyone would be doing it. Often it is not easy. And sometimes, like above, its a complete bloody mystery.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119733888#Comment_119733888

I'll have to agree to disagree. That outliers exist isn't a good reason to allow uninformed, simplistic, unresearched sweeping generalisation free reign. That's a poor argument.