Personal responsibility & health

[Kodos]

I have what I believe is an unusual perspective when it comes to caring for one's own health. I believe it is everyone's personal responsibility to proactively do things to maximize one's own health (eat food that is good for you, exercise regularly) and to actively avoid doing things that are known to be harmful to your health (smoking, drinking to excess, eating poorly, using hard drugs) because the preventable catastrophic illnesses that result from these choices are so devastating to one's family (emotional and financial damage) and to society in general (because of spiraling healthcare costs that everyone has to absorb). I realize that sometimes you are just unlucky due to genetics or happenstance. Those are not the people that I'm talking about. So many of the chronic diseases that our country endures (heart disease, diabetes, many of the cancers) are utterly avoidable with good choices (and are absent in countries that don't eat like we do).

What do you believe? Should people feel responsible for improving their own health?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Kodos

What do you believe? Should people feel responsible for improving their own health?

I think we're responsible -- where this subject in concerned -- for living our lives, with choices based on our priorities. I'll opt for some intentional hyperbole hear to illustrate what I mean.

I'd rather die at 50 sitting in this chair with a bbq pork sandwich in one hand & eyeing the cigarette I'm going to have afterwards than live to 80 walking to the organic food mart to have free-range tofu.

And I do mean that very literally. I have not enjoyed my time on this mortal coil very much, I'm not inclined to overly extend it, I've awakened pissed to discover that I've even awakened about as many days of my life as not. Why in the bloody fucking hell would I make myself miserable trying to stick around longer?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Kodos

What do you believe? Should people feel responsible for improving their own health?

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Jon's response is a totally valid one. Trying to force people to eat healthier, exercise more, avoid risky habits, etc. is a futile endeavor. The best you can do is provide good information for people so they have a better chance at making good decisions for themselves.

To the extent that risky behavior (in diet, bad habits, poor exercise, etc) are public problems, they can be addressed in certain ways. Taxes on cigarettes, alcohol, sugar, etc. can be levied and applied directly toward health care to address the results of those behaviors as well as act as a deterrent. Health insurance rates can reflect good decisions vs. poor decisions.

But the best solution is to spread good information and let individuals come to those choices on their own.

[tarcone]

Free will.

But I think healthcare should be free.

[Logan]

Jon's viewpoint is also fine for me as long as others who share it are funding their own health care and not relying on the government to keep them alive so they can keep on slamming burgers and fries.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Free will.

But I think healthcare should be free.

Me too. Should health care workers get paid? Should they buy the best medical equipment the world can offer? Should they get the best training?

I'm guessing food and water should be free too. One step at a time.

[kcchief19]

I understand and believe both viewpoints are valid.

For example, I always believed that people who engage in high-risk behavior should pay their own way. If you split open your skull because you aren't wearing a helmet riding a motorcycle, that's on you and I shouldn't have to subsidize it.

And I absolutely get Jon's point too. I'm a fat guy who finds it hard to lose weight, even as I get older and my body sees me signs it can't handle the weight as well as it once did. I've also made choices in my life that increase my short-term happiness realizing that it may not be in my long-term interest.

As I've grown older, my liberalism and spirituality has gotten a hold of me. Judge not lest ye be judged. We're all in this together. My hope is that everyone does the best they can to take care of themselves, but helping out and supporting one another is what I believe we should do as humanity, so I'm cool with whatever you want to do, so long as you don't harm others.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

Jon's viewpoint is also fine for me as long as others who share it are funding their own health care and not relying on the government to keep them alive so they can keep on slamming burgers and fries.

I've seen a doctor only once in the last ... well, I went to have a suspect mole checked out earlier this month (not a problem at all, as it turns out) and we couldn't figure out the last time I'd been to one. It's somewhere around fifteen years , so I'm pretty sure I'm holding up my end of the bargain at least.

The other folks? That's between you & them.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

so I'm pretty sure I'm holding up my end of the bargain at least.

There was zero doubt in my mind, don't worry.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

There was zero doubt in my mind, don't worry.

I figured we were cool on that, just seemed worth confirming

[korme]

Of course you should feel responsible for your own health. Things happen for no apparent reason but in the mean time do what you can to extend and control the things that you can.

[Fidatelo]

I'm with dawgfan.

[EagleFan]

Just where is the line about what is "healthy"?

[hollmt]

I guess I ride the fence on this. I feel responsible for my own health but I also rely and expect good care for the condition I do have. That happens to be Type 1 Diabetes and I was diagnosed with it while in the Navy. I clarify the type, because I think it is important. The vast majority (90-95%) are Type 2, which while still genetic, is still highly caused by bad lifestyle choices. Type 1, while genetic is not also caused by lifestyle choices. I imagine the same can be said about many types of cancer and other diseases. I do hold diabetes a little near to my heart obviously because when I tell someone I am diabetic, I can tell that often times the first thought in their head is....'you must have eaten like shit', then they look at me and are confused, because I am 5'11", 165 lbs.

I don't personally find the act of exercising to exercise fun. You know, going to the gym, or jogging just to jog. I also dont personally feel that I should always eat meat and veggies and drink water and remove anything from my life that is sweet and tastes good. I eat sweets. I eat many sweets and almost every time I do, I get questions from others asking if I am 'allowed' to have that food. Yes, I am allowed, I am a grown man . I like junk food and drink soda. I counter all of this though with FUN exercises, like basketball, ping pong, rowing, hiking, not consuming much alcohol (1-3 drinks/month) and not smoking. I have been diabetic since 1998 and have never weighed more than 170 nor had an A1C that was higher than 7.0 and that is pretty damn good. So, I try to balance fun and responsibility while not trying to be so on one side of the fence to miss out on that piece of cake. I also expect my providers at the VA Hospital and local practitioner to care for my diabetic needs and any conditions that the disease can cause to worsen and help me maintain good practices.

I think there can be a healthy balance between being responsible for your own body and health but also relying (probably not the right word here) on your healthcare providers to help educate you and provide other means to help you as you need it. It is up to you then to take that information and make use of it.

[Bonesaw]

Type II diabetes is 100% preventable, and if you have it, you shouldn't receive a lick of subsidized healthcare for it.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Bonesaw

Type II diabetes is 100% preventable, and if you have it, you shouldn't receive a lick of subsidized healthcare for it.

I think you are kind of getting into some Draconian level stuff here. I will use my brother as an example. He partied a lot in his late teens and early twenties. He got esophageal cancer in his forties. The doctors don't have any exact percentages but I think most agree this type of cancer is part lifestyle and just part bad genes and bad luck. So what if it had zero to do with his lifestyle and more to do with the fact that my dad and uncle (who both live the antitheses of the party lifestyle) had cancer in their forties as well? Who exactly is making the decision on what percentage of his hospital bills my brother is responsible for?

I'm not sure your type 2 comment is 100% correct that it is 100% preventable. So again who makes the decision on the guy that just has crappy genes and luck is responsible for all of his health care because the mob with pitchforks don't like fat people?

My health care provider provides incentives for good lifestyle choices with the ultimate reward... money. Pay a guy $50 to get screened early for prostate cancer and maybe save $100,000 down the road paying for a surgery of a later stage prostate cancer. Tell him he should get screened for his own good and maybe he pushes it off because he doesn't want a finger in his butt.

[Kodos]

Can we agree that for most people, Type II is preventable with dietary changes and regular exercise?

http://www.webmd.com/diabetes/news/2...-preventable#1

[SteveMax58]

Well its the age old argument that just about anything can be prevented if people did (or did not do) x. But not every person wants to live the lifestyle needed to avoid x. And it really does come down to imposing one person's values over another. We of course do that to degrees...such as outlawing murder & rape, even if there are some who would prefer it to be legal. But after the easy ones, it really is more philospohical than that imho.

In other words...if we agree that healthcare ought to be a shared cost...then we'll have to (or not i guess) get over the fact that some will benefit more than others. Because if not, then its along the same rationale that poverty could be solved by pulling oneself up by the bootstraps.

I think as dawgfan points out...putting the information out there is about the best we can do. Much like any other education type, some will be more drawn to it and implement actions based on that information than others. Anything beyond that, is essentially penalizing people for not sharing your values imo.

[Young Drachma]

The American viewpoint on this is a little ridiculous, but it fits everything else we do in this whole vein of "if only people did everything the way we wanted them to, there would be no problems."

[Kodos]

I don't agree that a person who works to take care of their health should be forced to subsidize the healthcare costs of people who make little or no effort to maintain good health.

People have every right to eat nothing but crap all day long while sitting on their butt. But they shouldn't expect me to help pay for their medical costs when they inevitably get sick.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I don't agree that a person who works to take care of their health should be forced to subsidize the healthcare costs of people who make little or no effort to maintain good health.

People have every right to eat nothing but crap all day long while sitting on their butt. But they shouldn't expect me to help pay for their medical costs when they inevitably get sick.

I agree with you in theory, but...

what about if you live a healthy lifestyle and get cancer. Why should I subsidize it? I wasnt born with shitty genes. Nor did I work in a dangerous environment, etc. Where does it end?

I'm pretty outspoken as a conservative and a capitalist around here, so this next point may be a bit surprising from me..

I'm all for healthcare PROVIDERS, I.E doctors making an excellent income. 4-5x the national average is perfectly reasonable to me. They sacrificed and went to school and deserve what they earn. Why are Hospital Managers making more than Docs? Why are drug company sales reps making double and triple what the scientists inventing the drugs are? The whole damn US Healthcare system needs to be blown the fawk up and recreated with common sense. There is no excuse why 2 advil should cost a hospital patient $78. Yet that's what it cost my sister recently after a car accident. No joke. There is no explanation where $78 is reasonable. Period. None. Fix that shit. Then we dont need to worry about who is subsidizing who because cost will be reasonable for all.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

what about if you live a healthy lifestyle and get cancer. Why should I subsidize it? I wasnt born with shitty genes. Nor did I work in a dangerous environment, etc. Where does it end?

I did specify in the original post that I wasn't talking about bad genes/bad luck people. I'm talking about people who make bad choices despite knowing the likely long-term consequences. People who smoke. People who ride motorcycles (especially those who do so without helmets). People who eat tons of meat, fat, salt and sugar. Alcohol abusers. Hard drug users. I'm not talking about the lifelong jogger who gets cancer because it runs in his family or because he lives in Flint, Michigan.

I do agree that our healthcare system needs to be blown up. Costs like your Advil example are ridiculous. We need to take the profit motive out of healthcare. Right now, doctors have no incentive to help patients avoid getting sick in the first place. They only get money for treating people who are sick. And it is financially better to put someone on medication for life rather than actually curing them.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

The American viewpoint on this is a little ridiculous, but it fits everything else we do in this whole vein of "if only people did everything the way we wanted them to, there would be no problems."

+1


Additionally:

-- What if the recommended diet by the FDA for a generation is wrong and causes a massive change in the food industry and a huge spike in diabetes?

-- We've banned cigarette ads because whether we like it or not, advertising works. Do we get a generation of banning TV ads for unhealthy food choices before we tell anyone who eats poorly to fuck off and die?

-- Childhood obesity is a problem and creates all kinds of problems for those kids as adults. Do we tell those kids to fuck off and die because their parents allowed them to make poor choices?

--Do we make changes to our farm subsidy programs that subsidize the hell out of corn and lead us to be a nation that sees high fructose corn syrup in EVERYTHING as a result?

-- We have a healthcare system designed around treating symptoms and problems, not preventing them in the first place. Do we take a generation to try to change this or do we just go ahead and take 1/4 of the country's healthcare away now?

People are ultimately responsible for their own health, despite all of the things listed above. But I do believe many people take an extremely narrow view of these topics.

[hollmt]

Yeah, I think this is why in the end, I ride the fence. There are just too many variables and what-ifs.

I can manage my Type 1 even though it wasn't at all my fault I got it. Should I have that big piece of cake? No, I probably should cut it in half, but it's good. And I am not going to punish myself and not allow myself to have good stuff because. I take the information that is given to me from good providers (speaking of that, I live in Indianapolis and I drive to the Dayton VA, every 6 months because I trust my providers there) and get educated. I am on an insulin pump that cost a shit ton of money....and I didn't pay for it at all. Do I feel badly about that? No, I dont. I served my time and it's a benefit. Some may disagree. I am on the pump, not because of bad choices, but because it helps manage things much better and accurately that manual shots or a pen and it helps.

So, yeah, I agree with Kodos on some points and maybe other points with other people. Some of you probably help pay for my insulin and strips and pump. Thanks .

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Radii

+1


Additionally:

-- What if the recommended diet by the FDA for a generation is wrong and causes a massive change in the food industry and a huge spike in diabetes?

The food industry actively lobbies the FDA to include foods that are known not to be healthy in the pyramid.

-- We've banned cigarette ads because whether we like it or not, advertising works. Do we get a generation of banning TV ads for unhealthy food choices before we tell anyone who eats poorly to fuck off and die?

I'm not telling anyone to fuck off and die. I'm just saying it is unfair that I pay more for their poor choices.

-- Childhood obesity is a problem and creates all kinds of problems for those kids as adults. Do we tell those kids to fuck off and die because their parents allowed them to make poor choices?

Nope. We need to do more to educate kids in school about good lifestyle choices, and the consequences of poor choices.

--Do we make changes to our farm subsidy programs that subsidize the hell out of corn and lead us to be a nation that sees high fructose corn syrup in EVERYTHING as a result?

Absolutely. If we're going to subsidize food, let's subsidize healthy foods.

-- We have a healthcare system designed around treating symptoms and problems, not preventing them in the first place. Do we take a generation to try to change this or do we just go ahead and take 1/4 of the country's healthcare away now?

People are ultimately responsible for their own health, despite all of the things listed above. But I do believe many people take an extremely narrow view of these topics.

Not trying to take away anyone's healthcare. Just wanting people who make poor lifestyle choices to be in a different risk-pool than people who take good care of themselves.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Kodos

People who eat tons of meat, fat, salt and sugar.

And this is where your argument goes from solid intellectual debate, into weird ass vegans trying to push their hidden agenda on everyone else.

Fact is we don't know the long term impacts of vegan dietary lifestyles. We dont know but there is rampant speculation about bone health, mental health, muscular degeneration and a number of other potential negative side effects. Do we really want a species of people who live longer because they avoid certain health effects but morph into the human equivalent of the vegetables they so adore. Who pays for THAT.


You and I have had this debate before. I'm not sold on your suggestion that diets high in Animal fats are more unhealthy than plant based diets. Yet you would like to cut funding to health for people who dont believe your unscientifically proven opinion.

Yet since you "feel" it is right, and have some evidence to its substance you think National policy should reflect that. That is a good precedence.

I think if people prayed more they would get sick less. I dont think I should have to subsidize medical costs for atheists and in fact we should just let them die. Screw them and their unhealthy non-praying assess.


Does it sound more ridiculous that way to you?

[Young Drachma]

Of all of the random ass things to complain about on a Friday, a backdoor screed on socialized medicine seems bizarre. Is there more to this story? Did the OP see his paycheck, annoyed at deductions and want to rail against the existence of Medicaid? See someone in the supermarket line getting too many ding-dongs and feel personally offended?

I dunno, man.

For a country largely full of people in the middle who are hellbent on being left alone, we sure do a great job of telling people what they ought to be doing.

Our Puritan roots persist no matter how far we get from them.

[Kodos]

We have plenty of cultures on earth who eat only a little or no meat, and they haven't turned into dundering, frail-boned freaks as far as I know. They actually tend to live longer and don't experience many of the chronic diseases that are the leading killers here in the U.S. So many of our chronic diseases are in essence lifestyle choices. There is plenty of science that says meat, dairy, and eggs are bad for you. You can ignore it if you like because it contradicts what you like to eat.

We used to have doctors endorsing different brands of cigarettes. It took a long time for science to become accepted by the general population. It's the same thing with food today. You have an industry actively working to sow misleading information in order to keep people buying unhealthy foods. Companies funding studies designed to contradict real scientific findings.


===========

A lot of this is probably better suited for the Forks Over Knives thread. This thread was really intended to be more about people taking personal responsibility to improve their health on an individual level. Exercising, eating better food, getting enough sleep, that sort of stuff. But it's metamorphed into what we should do with healthcare and who should pay for what.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Of all of the random ass things to complain about on a Friday, a backdoor screed on socialized medicine seems bizarre. Is there more to this story? Did the OP see his paycheck, annoyed at deductions and want to rail against the existence of Medicaid? See someone in the supermarket line getting too many ding-dongs and feel personally offended?

I dunno, man.

For a country largely full of people in the middle who are hellbent on being left alone, we sure do a great job of telling people what they ought to be doing.

Our Puritan roots persist no matter how far we get from them.

The general thought was this: Healthcare costs are horrible. A large part of that is because as a group, Americans are among the least-healthy people on earth. I believe that comes from what people eat and how little they exercise. The intention of the thread was that people should take more personal responsibility for maintaining own their health. Eat better. Exercise. Don't smoke. Inevitably, I guess, it quickly changed into an argument about how we should handle healthcare, and who should pay for what.

[Subby]

I ate five cupcakes yesterday.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Kodos

We have plenty of cultures on earth who eat only a little or no meat, and they haven't turned into dundering, frail-boned freaks as far as I know. They actually tend to live longer and don't experience many of the chronic diseases that are the leading killers here in the U.S. So many of our chronic diseases are in essence lifestyle choices. There is plenty of science that says meat, dairy, and eggs are bad for you. You can ignore it if you like because it contradicts what you like to eat.

We used to have doctors endorsing different brands of cigarettes. It took a long time for science to become accepted by the general population. It's the same thing with food today. You have an industry actively working to sow misleading information in order to keep people buying unhealthy foods. Companies funding studies designed to contradict real scientific findings.


===========

A lot of this is probably better suited for the Forks Over Knives thread. This thread was really intended to be more about people taking personal responsibility to improve their health on an individual level. Exercising, eating better food, getting enough sleep, that sort of stuff. But it's metamorphed into what we should do with healthcare and who should pay for what.

I believe it was started to subconsciously push your vegan/plant based agenda. Again this isnt a personal attack, I like you. Have enjoyed our many seasons in NCAAF dynasties and thank you for the effort you have put in there. Nothing personal here.

But to me, you are heading right towards an all too true stereotype.
You talk about people making "healthier" choices but what you mean is people making the same choices you make.

Throwing obscure generalities around like

We have plenty of cultures on earth who eat only a little or no meat, and they haven't turned into dundering, frail-boned freaks as far as I know. They actually tend to live longer and don't experience many of the chronic diseases that are the leading killers here in the U.S."

There really isnt a lot of data to support your "live longer narrative"

The US ranks 43th out of 225 recognized countries in life expectancy.
Source: http://www.infoplease.com/world/stat...y-country.html

When you take into account things like our Top 10 in highest automobile mortality rate, Top 10 in firearm related deaths, our proliferation of radiation exposure, etc etc etc.

Even further I am not sure who these "plenty of cultures" are who eat no meat. Reveal them so we can dig in and analyze this data.

There is ZERO data to support your flawed premise. You cant take a Tibetan Monk who doesnt eat meat, walks 20 miles a day, and has zero stress in life and compare him to a sedintary, overweight desk jockey in a high stress job in a major urban metor and say..."Yep See there! Fatboy ate a steak...thats what killed him" Thats not how stats work and you KNOW that.

But for some reason your confirmation bias wants you to believe this extreme sacrifice you are making is the right choice for all and anyone who disagrees is clearly making a poor choice.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Kodos

The general thought was this: Healthcare costs are horrible. A large part of that is because as a group, Americans are among the least-healthy people on earth. I believe that comes from what people eat and how little they exercise. The intention of the thread was that people should take more personal responsibility for maintaining own their health. Eat better. Exercise. Don't smoke. Inevitably, I guess, it quickly changed into an argument about how we should handle healthcare, and who should pay for what.

I don't think the idea that people should eat better and exercise is controversial in the slightest. So when you started the thread with "I think I have an unusual perspective" I think many people went straight past the obvious.


Should people eat better and exercise more? Yes. Thread over.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Eat better.

Because of this statement is why it went where it did.
Define better.

Better for whom?

We both agree that eating 5,000 calories a day is unhealthy for all but the most elite athlete regardless of those calories composition.

Hopefully we both agree that two handfuls of raw grains and 5 glasses of water isnt the only food our bodies can process and allow to remain healthy.

In the middle somewhere is where the rub is.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Subby

I ate five cupcakes yesterday.

But you worked them off on your bike!

[Kodos]

Blue Zone - Wikipedia

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Because of this statement is why it went where it did.
Define better.

Better for whom?

We both agree that eating 5,000 calories a day is unhealthy for all but the most elite athlete regardless of those calories composition.

Hopefully we both agree that two handfuls of raw grains and 5 glasses of water isnt the only food our bodies can process and allow to remain healthy.

In the middle somewhere is where the rub is.

Better, to me, is:
Less processed foods
Less salt, sugar, fat (probably could be lumped in with previous point)
More fresh (or frozen) fruits and veggies
Less meat
Less dairy
Less eggs

Look, I still enjoy a plate of wings or a lobster roll now and then. But most days, I stick to potatoes, veggie chili, oatmeal with fruit, starches, etc. I do eat some processed foods, but it's a small part of my diet. It isn't all or nothing. Even small shifts can make a difference.

[Subby]

[Kodos]

Nick!

[AENeuman]

I don't think it is possible to understate the amount of subsidy unhealthy foods receive and their negative impact. It's almost like saying, despite the fact that the government us using your tax money against you being healthy, your choices are all your own making.

Also, there is a giant economic bias here. In a way we are telling poor people they can't make the same bad (cupcake) decisions as everyone else because they lack a safety net. We are saying poor people must eat better than the rest of us because they don't have a margin of error.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I'm not telling anyone to fuck off and die. I'm just saying it is unfair that I pay more for their poor choices.

I don't have time to list more than 1 or 2 examples, but this is the cost of living in a civilized society. The guy who drivers a big 4x4 truck messes up my roads way more than me in my little car, so why do I have to pay the same as him for road repairs.

Also, consider that people who die younger from unhealthy choices do not get pensions, social security and other assorted government help in their older age, nevermind the higher need for medical services at those advanced ages.

I'd bet having a heart attack and dying younger is a lot cheaper on the populace than living a long time.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Marmel

I don't have time to list more than 1 or 2 examples, but this is the cost of living in a civilized society. The guy who drivers a big 4x4 truck messes up my roads way more than me in my little car, so why do I have to pay the same as him for road repairs.

If your state has gas taxes, then that big 4x4 truck driver probably is paying more than you are. Not for exactly the reason you cite, but it's not a terrible proxy either.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Marmel

I'd bet having a heart attack and dying younger is a lot cheaper on the populace than living a long time.

People who have a heart attack and die aren't the ones driving up costs. It's the long, lingering medically-expensive deaths that ratchet up the cost for everyone.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

I don't think it is possible to understate the amount of subsidy unhealthy foods receive and their negative impact. It's almost like saying, despite the fact that the government us using your tax money against you being healthy, your choices are all your own making.

Also, there is a giant economic bias here. In a way we are telling poor people they can't make the same bad (cupcake) decisions as everyone else because they lack a safety net. We are saying poor people must eat better than the rest of us because they don't have a margin of error.

+1

I am more than fine looking at myself as an individual and holding myself responsible for my choices and not looking for societal factors as an excuse whether they are there or not.

But when we talk about population numbers and the diabetes epidemic and society as a whole, I have a whole lot of places to point angry fingers at before I start looking for other fat people who don't excercise enough to worry about.

Fix many of the issues with food recommendations (without telling people that you have to be vegetarian which this thread is starting to get dangerously close to btw, just reasonable choices), with subsidies, with education, and with disease prevention, and the numbers will fix themselves.

With any luck, we could get to a point where all of our insurance premiums could come down a good bit, and it would really only be the poor, uninsured and underinsured who would be a drain on the system. But by then we'd have seen enough improvements that we wouldn't have to care about them and we could move on to a less uncomfortable problem, whew.

[digamma]

It's actually one of the unsung successes of the Obama administration. Promoting healthier eating and providing better access to natural and healthier foods. FLOTUS's initiatives are likely to be killed in the first 100 days or whatever, but she's done a lot of good, without giving anyone VEGAN.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by digamma

It's actually one of the unsung successes of the Obama administration. Promoting healthier eating and providing better access to natural and healthier foods. FLOTUS's initiatives are likely to be killed in the first 100 days or whatever, but she's done a lot of good, without giving anyone VEGAN.

You are wrong. She started to promote healthier eating. It started out that way. She promoted healthier eating. Which is what should happen. If you eat healthy, you have more energy.
Well, the food lobbyists jumped in and the big companies "sponsored" the Lets Move program. When that happened, she changed it to kids need to exercise more.

Initially, she was on the right track. But money won the day.

This is why Pizza is considered a vegetable when we are talking school lunches. One company supplies 80% of the pizzas to schools and they jumped in with money and got pizza labeled a vegi. You know, Tomato sauce.

Again, great idea gone bad.

[tarcone]

It is unfortunate that it costs a lot more money to eat healthy. The poor have no shot.

A box of ding dongs for $2.50 or the bag of apples for $6? A 2 liter of Pepsi for $1.50 or a gallon of milk for $3.50?

No chance.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I have not enjoyed my time on this mortal coil very much, I'm not inclined to overly extend it, I've awakened pissed to discover that I've even awakened about as many days of my life as not. Why in the bloody fucking hell would I make myself miserable trying to stick around longer?

jesus christ i think we've solved jon

The reason he's a misanthropic fuck of a human being is because he hates everything about being alive and thinks everybody else should be as miserable as he is.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by tarcone

You are wrong. She started to promote healthier eating. It started out that way. She promoted healthier eating. Which is what should happen. If you eat healthy, you have more energy.
Well, the food lobbyists jumped in and the big companies "sponsored" the Lets Move program. When that happened, she changed it to kids need to exercise more.

Initially, she was on the right track. But money won the day.

This is why Pizza is considered a vegetable when we are talking school lunches. One company supplies 80% of the pizzas to schools and they jumped in with money and got pizza labeled a vegi. You know, Tomato sauce.

Again, great idea gone bad.

I'm not sure what I'm wrong about. Many of the actions you describe are congressional in nature. The Let's Move and healthy eating programs that have been put in place through other means have largely been considered successful. But, start with "You're wrong." It's effective.

[tarcone]

Sorry. It pisses me off that she started what could have been THE defining program of the Obama administration. And then big food companies saw the potential harm it would cause their companies. The food companies flashed some bills and she changed her tune.

I didnt mean to come off as jumping on your chest. But, again, a politician thinks with their pockets instead of doing what is right.

I dont think it was congressional in nature at all. It was food companies lobbying her to change her tune. And she did.

[cthomer5000]

Not really seeing any discussion about the financial realities of eating healthier. It's genuinely WAY more expensive to eat healthy than it is to eat complete trash. You're lucky if you've never financial considerations impact what you're feeding yourself or your family - and you're probably taking a lot for granted.

I think in general people who do well financially in life don't realize how many others are truly living paycheck to paycheck and how that materially impacts daily life.

[timmae]

If somehow we were able to ban alcohol and drugs so that there was absolutely zero consumption then we would have zero drug related deaths. People are gonna die other ways my friend. This is not a perfect world and never will be.