• 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
as i said in the post. they screwed the poor smokers right to the wall. it was insane. glad i quit, and thank you Allen Carr.

Smoking is a choice. No one is born a smoker.
 
Should medically judged fat people pay higher medical costs?

Only if rich people get charged more for being able to afford it.
 
I'm sorry but that's just not an answer. I'm by no means a political conservative or progressive, but to have a position of, as you do, "Well poor people all eat fattening food so we have to base everything our society does off that reality" is deeply flawed any way you cut it.

Poor people are always going to eat fattening food, no matter what. They're uneducated and that's why. They smoke. They don't exercise. They don't use birth control. They have children at 17. It isn't a matter of wealth. Eating healthy can be extremely cheap too. Eating fattening foods is actually rather expensive. It isn't cheap as you claim it is. MacDonald's takes money. The grocery store is cheaper by far.

It's simply not true that a healthy eating lifestyle is more economically feasible than an unhealthy one.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/a-high-price-for-healthy-food/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

The poor are uneducated because our government burdens people who choose to pursue a college education with student loan debt as opposed to free higher education. They smoke cigarettes, marijuana, or whatever other drug because our criminal "justice" system values punishment over rehabilitation. They don't exercise because jobs with poor pay require long hours. They either don't use birth control because they can't afford it or the birth control doesn't work. It's not a fool proof system. You're painting it out as though the poor chose this lifestyle because they're lazy and want society to do everything for them, but that heavily conflicts with reality.

Either way, as a liberal poster posted previously, fat people actually do end up over long periods of time paying more for health care, obviously, but not near enough compared to what they end up costing non fat people in the short and medium term.


If a fat person has to make 15 doctor trips from age 50-60 and a non fat person has to make 5 doctor trips from 50-60, how is that fair that the non fat persons bills are heavily influenced by the fat persons as obviously the industry does? It is basically indirect theft of people who stay healthy.

I'm of the opinion that healthcare should be free and government funded. Systems such as this are actually cheaper in other countries, so it would save tax dollars for the healthy people you seem to be so concerned about.

Encouraging and rewarding healthy lifestyles is not 'shaming.'

Apologies to you and the OP; I misread the post about shaming people as coming from the OP. It came from someone else. But making someone living an unhealthy lifestyle because they cannot afford any better is in no way going to encourage them to live a better lifestyle.

Let me give you a real life situation: Methamphetamine producers/dealers frequently get severe burns over large portions of their bodies when a batch blows up all over them. I know of one burn unit that had to treat so many injured, uninsured meth producers that it was well on the way to closing its doors due to lack of funding. In fact, it may already have, I have not talked to anyone who would know lately. Treatment of serious burns involves long expensive hospitalizations, expensive surgeries like skin grafts, and expensive medications to prevent or treat infections. So, we are all equal in your eyes. Go cook yourself along with your batch of meth and Dr. Feelgood will treat you with the most modern methods available to medical science with no regard for the cost to people who likely are just scraping by in their own households to pay the bills.

That is a really lopsided house you are building there. People really need to expect to have to be responsible for the choices they make in life. Granted there are many illnesses that are not so clear cut, and with medications that cause metabolic changes, obesity is one. But cooking meth , smoking, doing drugs, driving while drunk, and many other things are choices. Making those choices should come with a price for the person who made them.

As I stated before, I'm of the opinion that healthcare is a human right. And human rights are pretty cheap if you exclude people from them at will. People make irresponsible choices, yes. I'm not clear on why cooking meth makes people deserving of any aid whatsoever. If someone does something illegal or immoral, that does not mean they've lost their value as humans.
 
I don't really this smarmy way of trying to control people. I know it might add costs to healthcare, but this is SUPPOSED to be a free country.

Oh, I know, I know, sure they can be fat if they want, but they'll have to pay more. It just seems like a scheme to control. What's going to be next?
 
Well, there is an alternative, but it isn't very popular.

Is that supposed to be funny? The alternative is to use valid actuarial risk factors for setting health insurance premium rates, just as was done by the states for medical care insurance prior to PPACA and continues to be the case for other forms of "private" insurance. To place such severe, and arbitrary, restrictions on actuarial health risk factors is political correctness run amok.
 
OK, well, that was a little convoluted, but I think I get what you are saying. But bear in mind that obesity is not always caused by over eating. There are medications and metabolic illnesses that cause people who eat reasonably to be obese.

The point is that aging is a completely natural process and not caused by "wrong" living. Both obesity and age are valid actuarial medical care insurance risk factors yet obesity was dropped by a federal gov't mandate.
 
People who are overweight, people who do drugs, people who smoke, people who engage in hazardous activities (motorcycle racing, base jumping), people who refuse to exercise, all should pay more for health care.

People who have medical conditions that they can't change through a change of lifestyle should not.

The rationale is to provide an incentive to change unhealthy lifestyle choices.

I think that says it all.

You wanna eat donuts instead of apples...you should pay for your higher medical costs.
 
I'm not overweight, I'm in Good shape and probably will never be overweight, but being overweight doesn't always mean that you're unhealthy.

The distinction should be made between real obesity and what most people would assume is being obesd.

My Grandmother is in her 90s, and as far back as I can remember she was a Big woman.

She was very active, kept a huge garden and even smoked.

Started when she was 16.
 
Is that supposed to be funny? The alternative is to use valid actuarial risk factors for setting health insurance premium rates, just as was done by the states for medical care insurance prior to PPACA and continues to be the case for other forms of "private" insurance. To place such severe, and arbitrary, restrictions on actuarial health risk factors is political correctness run amok.
No, the alternative to getting old is to die young. It's not a popular option.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Everyone needs to cease the personal attacks or there will be consequences.
 
Should medically judged fat people pay higher medical costs?

What is this, grasping at a chance to feel morally superior? Like, fat people are fat because they lack character? Because they don't resist temptation like slim people?
 
I think it's disgraceful that people continue to make such suggestions to penalize people who suffer from genetic imperfections and being fat has as much to do with genetics as anything else and medical science is becoming more aware of the connections every day.

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.

Based on a large national study, body mass index (or BMI, an indicator of excess body fat) was higher every year between 1986 and 2002 among adults in the lowest income group and the lowest education group than among those in the highest income and education groups, respectively (Truong & Sturm, 2005).

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?

http://health.usnews.com/health-new...9/09/29/eating-in-america-still-unhealthy-cdc
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cdc-80-percent-of-american-adults-dont-get-recommended-exercise/
http://frac.org/initiatives/hunger-...le-at-greater-risk-for-overweight-or-obesity/
 
Last edited:
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?

You forgot don't exercise enough. I am fat because I eat too much, AND I don't exercise enough.
 
Should medically judged fat people pay higher medical costs?
They should pay their medical bills regardless. You pay for yours, I'll pay for mine, they can pay for theirs.
 
Mine is the same but in my defense I have a bad back, bad knees and arthritis. I have enough braces, heating pads, ice packs, comfort cushions, NSAIDS, meds, creams, roll on's and patches to start a pharmacy. I eat half the calories I used too in my 30's and still struggle with weight gain.
 
Mine is the same but in my defense I have a bad back, bad knees and arthritis. I have enough braces, heating pads, ice packs, comfort cushions, NSAIDS, meds, creams, roll on's and patches to start a pharmacy. I eat half the calories I used too in my 30's and still struggle with weight gain.

Sorry to hear that, and that's another issue. Some people cannot help but be overweight because of their limited mobility.
 
Sorry to hear that, and that's another issue. Some people cannot help but be overweight because of their limited mobility.


Thank you. :)
Don't get me wrong, I have a good life, it's just hard sometimes. I used to be quite active, but painful joints will force you to slow down.
 
Thank you. :)
Don't get me wrong, I have a good life, it's just hard sometimes. I used to be quite active, but painful joints will force you to slow down.

You're welcome. I do a lot of strength training in the hopes of preventing those kinds of issues as I age. I've heard that if you strengthen the muscles around those joints, they aren't as bothersome.
 
You're welcome. I do a lot of strength training in the hopes of preventing those kinds of issues as I age. I've heard that if you strengthen the muscles around those joints, they aren't as bothersome.

I was an athlete and did a lot of physical training most my life, which I thought was helping me. But it's the very, over exertion of my muscles and the corresponding joints that caused the wear, tear and eventual damage. Much of my arthritis is do to my strenuous exercising, according to my doctors. I asked them, what should I have done, and they said, less impact and more moderation. We thought "no pain, no gain" back then, but now they know better.

If you look at the statistics, professional athletes in general have more physical problems from overuse, less quality and shorter life spans. Even with arthritis, you need to do some movement but it varies, day to day and is extremely limited.

Of course much of this is situational and genetics, but I can't stress enough low impact, like swimming, yoga, Thai Chi, cycling and walking. Running, stepping, climbing, skiing, and any sports with contact are all very rough on you in old age. Even golfing can be hazardous, if you're an intense player.
 
I was an athlete and did a lot of physical training most my life, which I thought was helping me. But it's the very, over exertion of my muscles and the corresponding joints that caused the wear, tear and eventual damage. Much of my arthritis is do to my strenuous exercising, according to my doctors. I asked them, what should I have done, and they said, less impact and more moderation. We thought "no pain, no gain" back then, but now they know better.

If you look at the statistics, professional athletes in general have more physical problems from overuse, less quality and shorter life spans. Even with arthritis, you need to do some movement but it varies, day to day and is extremely limited.

Of course much of this is situational and genetics, but I can't stress enough low impact, like swimming, yoga, Thai Chi, cycling and walking. Running, stepping, climbing, skiing, and any sports with contact are all very rough on you in old age. Even golfing can be hazardous, if you're an intense player.

Yes, the most strenuous sport I've ever done was gymnastics, and that was years ago when I was like 10 or 12 years old. I've never done contact sports or anything like that. I do find that after working (sitting in my stupid chair), my neck and shoulders bother me, but if I exercise, the pain is MUCH less.
 
Yes, the most strenuous sport I've ever done was gymnastics, and that was years ago when I was like 10 or 12 years old. I've never done contact sports or anything like that. I do find that after working (sitting in my stupid chair), my neck and shoulders bother me, but if I exercise, the pain is MUCH less.


A common area for wear and tear is the C4 vertebrae disk in the neck area, basically the one your head swivels on. Mine is damaged and causes me pain if I sleep wrong or run too much hot water on it. Also, holding your arm in an outward position for a long period, like a computer mouse will set it off.

Women are more susceptible to Fibromyalgia, Rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis. You sound like you're being pretty smart about your exercise routine, so hopefully you'll stay healthy into your senior years. :mrgreen:
 
A common area for wear and tear is the C4 vertebrae disk in the neck area, basically the one your head swivels on. Mine is damaged and causes me pain if I sleep wrong or run too much hot water on it. Also, holding your arm in an outward position for a long period, like a computer mouse will set it off.

Women are more susceptible to Fibromyalgia, Rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis. You sound like you're being pretty smart about your exercise routine, so hopefully you'll stay healthy into your senior years. :mrgreen:

Thanks, and what you describe above sounds exactly like my problem with my neck and shoulders. It only hurts when I'm working though, something about my computer chair I think. I think I should look into getting a new chair.
 
Thanks, and what you describe above sounds exactly like my problem with my neck and shoulders. It only hurts when I'm working though, something about my computer chair I think. I think I should look into getting a new chair.


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.
 
Back
Top Bottom