• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should medically judged fat people pay higher medical costs? [W:87]

Should medically judged fat people pay higher medical costs?

  • Yes

    Votes: 31 42.5%
  • No

    Votes: 42 57.5%

  • Total voters
    73
Two things to address first, make sure your screen is level with your head. If you have to look up or downward to see the monitor, then that will cause positional pain. Either raise/drop the chair or monitor. If your chair doesn't adjust, you can raise the screen by placing a book underneath it. If you need to lower it try to pull the monitor forward from the top with both hands. Some of the monitors will let you adjust the tilt on them up or down, by pushing the top forward or back.

The other consideration is resting your mouse pointing limb, from always being extended on the chair arm. When you have your arm positioned like that for a long period, it causes pain also. Both those moves put exertion on the C4 disk. Try pulling your arm away from the mouse, when your not using it and rest it in your lap. I'm ambidextrous and had to switch sides, using my left hand to control the mouse for awhile, till my neck got better.

Of course ice packs on the neck for 10 minutes at a time and Advil or Aleve can help a lot.

Oh, I need a new chair. My chair is too big for me, and the back is not adjustable. I know that's a big part of the problem for me.

Thanks for the advice! :)
 
Can you tell us what percentage of overweight people are in that condition due to genetics and which ones are there because of over eating? Don't tire yourself looking, the statistics don't seem to exist. However, what does exist is a an overlap between poverty, overeating, bad nutrition and obesity. Only 33% of Americans meet the suggested fruit servings per day. 27% eat the suggested vegetable servings. Inversely, 2/3rds of Americans have some sort of weight problem. That's just the nutritional aspect of things.

As far as exercise goes, 50% of Americans simply don't and 80% don't get the exercise they should. So what does that tell us? We're eating crappy food and exercising less.

Finally, the poor seem to have it worst when it comes to obesity within the American landscape.



So in short, while there is no definitive statistic we know a few things that are definitely making people fatter:

1. Bad nutrition.
2. Lack of exercise.
3. Being so uneducated/poor they can't make (for financial/economic reasons) healthier choices.

All of those things could be corrected, however the mentality in America is that any attempt at fixing the problem is a restriction of freedoms. So why should people who do the exact opposite and make the correct lifestyle choices pay more for the large numbers of people who don't?

Eating in America Still Unhealthy: CDC - US News
CDC: 80 percent of American adults don't get recommended exercise - CBS News
Relationship Between Poverty and Overweight or Obesity « Food Research & Action Center

I don't disagree with your comments because we don't yet know the extent to which genetics plays a role and we don't yet know the extent to which chemicals in foods - such as steroids in chicken - impact the amount of excess fat some people pack on without "bad behaviour".

As for the poor being fatter, I don't disagree about that as well. I would point out, however, that often the foods that are best for you are the ones that cost the most - fresh fruits and vegetables, as an example, cost more than canned that are often heavily salted.

But if you follow the logic of the OP, we should charge poor people more for healthcare because their poverty promotes their lifestyle related health issues. That sounds like a winner in the logical conclusions game.
 
Some of those aren't preventable.....

How can you even begin to compare those??? Tells us a lot about your intelligence..

Underlying type 2 diabetes is a genetic condition which makes the person who has it much more prone to obesity, than one without this condition. The body tends to store more calories as fat, while tending to convert less to immediately-usable energy. One has to eat more, just to have the energy to function normally, and by doing so, one ends up having more energy stored as fat. And the more fat one puts on who has this condition, the worse the condition gets, especially once it manifests as full-blown type 2 diabetes.

This condition is pervasive on my father's side of my family. My father, all his brothers, my brother, and myself, all eventually developed type 2 diabetes. I've watched these men struggle to control their weight. It's not laziness nor gluttony that makes people with this condition obese.

Oddly, I've been spared this aspect of the condition. I think I have some other condition—never diagnosed or otherwise identified—which has the opposite effect. Through childhood, adolescence, and into adulthood, I was always thin and frail to an unhealthy degree. Only since my type 2 diabetes manifested, I have been able to put on a healthy amount of weight, but it seems not to be inclined to go into the overweight range.
 
Diabetes can be brought on by poor diet.

No, it cannot.

Type 1 diabetes is caused by an autoimmune disorder, which attacks and destroys the pancreas.

Type 2 diabetes is caused by a genetic disorder which interferes with the chemical action of insulin.

Neither of these conditions is ever caused by poor diet. Both of these conditions require a specialized diet, but if you do not have the underlying autoimmune or genetic disorders that cause them, then no amount of poor diet will will ever cause you to develop either condition.
 
No, it cannot.

Type 1 diabetes is caused by an autoimmune disorder, which attacks and destroys the pancreas.

Type 2 diabetes is caused by a genetic disorder which interferes with the chemical action of insulin.

Neither of these conditions is ever caused by poor diet. Both of these conditions require a specialized diet, but if you do not have the underlying autoimmune or genetic disorders that cause them, then no amount of poor diet will will ever cause you to develop either condition.

Type 2 diabetes CAN be caused by one's lifestyle, such as obesity or lack of exercise. Of course it is not as simple as slightly over eating or not being as active as one should; and both of which would need to occur over the long term. Also genetic predisposition plays into things. Poor diet will NEVER cause type 1 diabetes; poor diet CAN trigger type 2 diabetes if there is a genetic predisposition.
 
Quite frankly this is a disgusting thread. All it does is show the extent that people want to go in order to control other peoples lives in a way that THEY think a person should live. What the hell ever happened to "live and let live"? Or that big scary word...FREEDOM?
 
I believe that a discussion on this is an exercise in futility. Companies that sell health insurance have in the past either denied policies to high risk populations, or they have charged higher premiums. Now with the ACA, any attempt at getting people to live responsibly has been shot in the foot. We will ALL shoulder the higher costs. I certainly think, though, that there should be some 'reward' for the person who practices good health maintenance, not smoking, rotting his liver with alcohol or drugs, keeping weight under control, not engaging in risky sports, etc. But I'm sure that will not occur in my lifetime.

And the poster earlier was correct, not everyone can keep their weight at an optimal level because there are so many medications which cause metabolic changes and concurrent weight gain.

There is a 'reward' for the person who practices good health maintenance, not smoking, rotting his liver with alcohol or drugs, keeping weight under control, not engaging in risky sports, etc.

The reward is knowing you have done your best to stay healthy and perhaps you may even longer because of your healthy life style choices.
 
People who don't use seat belts. Gay men who don't use condoms during sex. People who don't floss. People who ride on lawn tractors. Kids who run with scissors. People who have a bar of soap in their bathtubs.

Talk about an endless list of possibilities, right??

Women should pay tons more cause they're women. :2bump:



:inandout:
 
What about epileptics? Or mentally retarded? Or diabetics?

or smokers, pot smokers, anorexic people, over achievers, stressed out career addicts, people who overwork way too much, people who are thin but have horrible eating habits, drug users, pain killer users, pain killer abusers, people who work out too much, people who do extreme sports, etc. etc. etc.
 
There is a 'reward' for the person who practices good health maintenance, not smoking, rotting his liver with alcohol or drugs, keeping weight under control, not engaging in risky sports, etc.

The reward is knowing you have done your best to stay healthy and perhaps you may even longer because of your healthy life style choices.

Sometimes. I did all that, and ended up devastatingly medically ill anyway. It IS possible to do everything right and still lose. Life is a craps shoot.
 
Women should pay tons more cause they're women. :2bump:



:inandout:

LOL. What I learned in nursing school is that woman live longer than men. That is common knowledge. But women go to the doctor more for health maintenance services more than men do. Men tend to wait until they are sick. Woman go for that yearly pelvic and pap smear. Men don't go for a yearly PSA, but they should.
 
LOL. What I learned in nursing school is that woman live longer than men. That is common knowledge. But women go to the doctor more for health maintenance services more than men do. Men tend to wait until they are sick. Woman go for that yearly pelvic and pap smear. Men don't go for a yearly PSA, but they should.

Go every year to have a finger up my ass? I'm not likely to do that once let alone every single year. lol
 
Go every year to have a finger up my ass? I'm not likely to do that once let alone every single year. lol

OK, well, I can identify with that. A few years ago a doctor gave me an antibiotic that killed out all the normal flora of my intestines. I had to have a sigmoidoscopy. I've also had a transesophageal echocardiogram. I refuse to have either again. I told a doctor I worked with that no one is going shove anything up my ass or down my throat ever again. He told me I am no fun! LOL. If I get colon cancer they can diagnose it when I double over in pain. But cancer really doesn't run in my family. And I don't have any bad habits. So I'm not very worried.
 
Quite frankly this is a disgusting thread. All it does is show the extent that people want to go in order to control other peoples lives in a way that THEY think a person should live. What the hell ever happened to "live and let live"? Or that big scary word...FREEDOM?

Along with freedom comes responsibility. Want to surf the ten meter waves? Go for it. Want to sit on the couch eating potato chips every evening? Go for it. Do what you like. However, if what you like raises the cost of medical care, be prepared to pay more than people who don't engage in risky behavior.
 
OK, well, I can identify with that. A few years ago a doctor gave me an antibiotic that killed out all the normal flora of my intestines. I had to have a sigmoidoscopy. I've also had a transesophageal echocardiogram. I refuse to have either again. I told a doctor I worked with that no one is going shove anything up my ass or down my throat ever again. He told me I am no fun! LOL. If I get colon cancer they can diagnose it when I double over in pain. But cancer really doesn't run in my family. And I don't have any bad habits. So I'm not very worried.

I have always hated doctors. My knee has been bothering me since I was teenager and what they said originally is that it was growing pains and it would go away, but it never did and I suspect it was caused from a hit I took during a high school football game to my knee by a huge fat kid that couldn't make a tackle if his life depended on it. I suspect its a tear of some sort, but I can't bring myself to go to the doctor for it. :D I doubt I will live long, but honestly old age sounds like it sucks hard, so I don't care much.
 
Last edited:
I have always hated doctors. My knee has been bothering me since I was teenager and what they said originally is that it was growing pains and it would go away, but it never did and I suspect it was caused from a hit I took during a high school football game to my knee by a huge fat kid that couldn't make a tackle if his life depended on it. I suspect its a tear of some sort, but I can't bring myself to go to the doctor for it. :D I doubt I will live long, but honestly old age sounds like it sucks hard, so I don't care much.

LOL. Old age does suck. If all you have is a torn meniscus in your knee then that is easily fixed with a scope. If you have a torn ligament or it is bone to bone, not so easy.
 
I don't disagree with your comments because we don't yet know the extent to which genetics plays a role and we don't yet know the extent to which chemicals in foods - such as steroids in chicken - impact the amount of excess fat some people pack on without "bad behaviour".

As for the poor being fatter, I don't disagree about that as well. I would point out, however, that often the foods that are best for you are the ones that cost the most - fresh fruits and vegetables, as an example, cost more than canned that are often heavily salted.

To be honest, I don't even buy the "healthy foods cost more" argument. There are three reasons. The first is that the average American now eats less at home than they did 20 years ago. In short, we have become fans of snacking. The second is that portion sizes have more than doubled in the same period as obesity rates. The third is that stores like Walmart make it incredibly affordable to buy vegetables and fruits.

Take-Out Foods, Restaurant Meals Tied to Obesity Trend - Online Medical Encyclopedia - University of Rochester Medical Center
Portion Sizes and Obesity, News & Events, NHLBI, NIH
Walmart Wild Oats: America’s largest grocer is rolling out a line of cheap organic food products.

In short, food has gotten cheaper thanks to stores like Walmart (as much as I hate to admit it). People continue to eat out regularly and more. How can it be more expensive for you to buy a few vegetables at a store and make a basic stir fry? How can it be more expensive to avoid fatty foods that cost $12 a plate then buy fruits for a week for the same prices? Hell, a run to your local farmer's market will net you about 3 weeks worth of apples for $12. So how is it more expensive to simply cook at home and avoid fatty foods? No. It really isn't.

But if you follow the logic of the OP, we should charge poor people more for healthcare because their poverty promotes their lifestyle related health issues. That sounds like a winner in the logical conclusions game.

If you follow the logic of the OP, overweight people - regardless of income - will be charged more for poor lifestyle choices that could easily be curved so the rest of us who do make healthy life choices aren't forced to pay more for them.
 
Should medically judged fat people pay higher medical costs?

Is obesity always the fault of the individual? There's quite a few disorders and medical treatments out there where significant weight gain is directly related to the disorder or the treatment. On top of that, should our capitalist culture share no part of the blame? Our kids get inundated with commercials for candy, burgers, and sweet cereals almost every waking hour, and there's not much parents can do to prevent this. Sure, they can turn off the television...but the kids still see it in other kids' houses, in school, at the mall...you name it.

What's more, major food producers and restaurant chains do scientific and statistical studies to find out exactly what foods people love the most...and we eat those foods and we do love them - we can't help it, because we're human and our taste buds love this food more than that food. They even do research on what aromas we like the most, and when we smell those aromas, we get hungry, our mouths start watering. McDonald's french fries are a prime example...and the smoke coming out of that little chimney coming out of Burger King joints isn't there because they need a chimney - it's there to pump out the smell that attracts humans to the feeding trough.

And there's nothing - absolutely nothing - we can do about any of this, short of tyrannical, draconian actions that none of us (including myself) would tolerate. So we're stuck with it.

So...perhaps a better question would be, "Should people be charged more for physical conditions that may not be their fault?"
 
Being fat is a condition of epilepsy? Of mental retardation?

On the other hand obesity is often a major contributor to the onset of Type II diabetes. There is a great deal of research that indicates major weight loss and physical activity can and does greatly lessen the affects of diabetes II to the point of reducing or obviating the need for medication while improving circulation, reducing blood pressure and cholesterol and thus reducing overall medical costs.

There is a direct correlation of lifestyle and diabetes II.

Exactly. Two years ago I was diagnosed as being diabetic, and a bunch of other stuff. I started eating better and started exercising and lost weight, and I am now off of most of the medications that I was on. I guess that technically I am still diabetic, but I control it with diet, instead of pills.
 
No, it cannot.

Type 1 diabetes is caused by an autoimmune disorder, which attacks and destroys the pancreas.

Type 2 diabetes is caused by a genetic disorder which interferes with the chemical action of insulin.

Neither of these conditions is ever caused by poor diet. Both of these conditions require a specialized diet, but if you do not have the underlying autoimmune or genetic disorders that cause them, then no amount of poor diet will will ever cause you to develop either condition.

I believe that you are correct about Type 1, but may be incorrect about type 2.

I was a fat lazy slob who had type 2, now I am fit and trim and eat a better diet, and I no longer need medication for diabetes. Yes, I do believe that there may be a genetic predisposition for type 2, but from my personal experience, I also believe that diet contributes to it, and that it can be dealt with by diet.

There is nothing better than to hear your doc say "congratulations, you have dieted yourself to health".
 
Last edited:
Quite frankly this is a disgusting thread. All it does is show the extent that people want to go in order to control other peoples lives in a way that THEY think a person should live. What the hell ever happened to "live and let live"? Or that big scary word...FREEDOM?

But why should someone who lives a healthy lifestyle have to pay for the "freedom" of someone who doesn't?

I do tend to agree that everyone should pay the exact same amount for health insurance though. If we charged for insuranced based upon every discoverable detail of ones lifestyle and genetic traits, then insurance really wouldn't be insurance, as we would all be charged for insurance almost exactly the same as our medical bills cost (plus insurance co. overhead and profit). that would defeat the purpose of insurance.

thats part of the reason that I support government paid for universal major medical insurance. Assuming that it truly was major medical (covering only expenses that would otherwise be financially disasterous), and had a consumer pays portion of EVERY medical proceedure (to promote consumers shopping for insurance so that providers have a reason to compete on price and quality), such insurance could be paid with the money that government, all levels combined, already spend on healthcare. When I was researching this, about four or five years ago, I found that all levels of government combined spent about 1.2 trillion dollars a year on healthcare. that averaged out to about $4k per citizen, which is ample to pay for a major medical policy for every individual.

We could still indirectly charge for the externalities that people create by unhealthy eating, just by having a sin tax on foods which are exceptionally poor choices, and then use the revenues from this sin tax to help to pay for the universal insurance. So maybe we tax the heck out of sugar, then that tax gets indirectly or directly passed on to people who eat a large amount of sugar filled foods, and thus they end up paying a little additional for their medical care, while at the same time they are disincentivised from making those bad choices. We could tax any food that contains more than X% of it's calories in fats the same way.

It's not a perfect system, but it's probably the best system, and most politically viable system that we could have.
 
Last edited:
What about epileptics? Or mentally retarded? Or diabetics?

With the exception of adult onset diabetics, they did not do that to themselves. If you are obese, its due to lifestyle. I don't think your costs for procedures should be marked up, but the cost of your insurance premiums should reflect the added risk that your life choices (in this case being obese) result in. The same would be true for smokers.
 
In addition to Crue Cab's list of medical conditions, how about professional race car drivers? Professional wrestlers? Boxers? Olympic skiers?

They do carry additional policies to cover the risks of their profession.

Bunge jumpers? Parachutists? Bad drivers?


Bunge Jumpers and Sky Divers sign a waver. Bad drivers typically pay a lot more for auto insurance.


Alcoholics? People who drive motor cycles? People who get X-number of speeding tickets? Traffic accidents?

;)

These people all pay more for auto insurance.

Health insurance is the only form of insurance where your life choices and the risks associated with them are typically not accounted for with your premiums. For example, a guy that regularly exercises, eats a whole foods diet, and never smoked, will usually pay the same rate as a guy that is morbidly obese, never exercises, and eats nothing but fast food.

My profile picture is a picture of me when I finished a 9 mile run in below zero weather. I eat well, am dedicated to my personal fitness, and my physicals and blood work always reflects that, so why should some fat ass that sits around eating crap all day and never exercises pay the same health insurance rate that I do?
 
To be honest, I don't even buy the "healthy foods cost more" argument. There are three reasons. The first is that the average American now eats less at home than they did 20 years ago. In short, we have become fans of snacking. The second is that portion sizes have more than doubled in the same period as obesity rates. The third is that stores like Walmart make it incredibly affordable to buy vegetables and fruits.

Take-Out Foods, Restaurant Meals Tied to Obesity Trend - Online Medical Encyclopedia - University of Rochester Medical Center
Portion Sizes and Obesity, News & Events, NHLBI, NIH
Walmart Wild Oats: America’s largest grocer is rolling out a line of cheap organic food products.

In short, food has gotten cheaper thanks to stores like Walmart (as much as I hate to admit it). People continue to eat out regularly and more. How can it be more expensive for you to buy a few vegetables at a store and make a basic stir fry? How can it be more expensive to avoid fatty foods that cost $12 a plate then buy fruits for a week for the same prices? Hell, a run to your local farmer's market will net you about 3 weeks worth of apples for $12. So how is it more expensive to simply cook at home and avoid fatty foods? No. It really isn't.



If you follow the logic of the OP, overweight people - regardless of income - will be charged more for poor lifestyle choices that could easily be curved so the rest of us who do make healthy life choices aren't forced to pay more for them.

You clearly don't live in the northern parts of your country if you think fresh fruits and vegetables are inexpensive. When a watermelon costs $15 in the winter months, not too many poor people are going to choose it. I eat plenty of fresh fruits and vegetables year round, but here in Toronto, as an example, I pay dearly for anything edible and with any flavour.

As for changing lifestyles, the very poorest, those most likely to live the way you suggest, are the ones most likely not to pay for their own healthcare so the argument that if they paid more, the rest would pay less, isn't necessarily a logical result.

I drive a car and never use public transit - should I have to pay for those who do? If you want to play that game, claiming that societal costs should be shouldered mostly by those who access the services, then you've got a long way to go to have that user pay concept actualized.
 
Back
Top Bottom