• 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
This one doesn't look poor. Now what?

VkYKAUB.png

Why Low-Income and Food Insecure People are Vulnerable to Overweight and Obesity « Food Research & Action Center

I trump your picture with an actual study. Now what?
 
Wrong.

What I and most rational, normal weight Americans want is simply for medically judged (by a doctor) obese Americans to be told:

"Hi, Sir or M'am, your medical file says medically obese so the charge will be $300.00 today. Thank you."

and then

"Hi Sir or Ma'm, your medical file says normal medical weight for age, so the charge will be $150.00 today. Thank you."


THAT is what we want. We do not want to keep being charged to pay for your daily box of sugar donuts and Twinkies via increased medical bills for all.


VkYKAUB.png

Maybe that's a good argument for sin taxes on food that leads to poor health. We could tax the heck out of sugar, and any food that has more than X% of it's calories from fat. Now since I eat a fairly healthy diet, it wouldn't effect me much, and I wouldn't really mind occasionally paying an extra buck or two for a cheat meal box of cookies, but it would be a pretty stiff disincentive for other people to excessively eat bad food. The revenues could then be used to fund a special insurance pool, or better yet, to help fund universal major medical insurance.

It seems better to me to charge people for being fat by charging them more for over consuming what makes them fat, rather than to try to figure out who's poor health is due to bad eating habits. That way we are helping to prevent fat related illness, rather than just having to figure out how to pay for the illness.
 
Last edited:
What about epileptics? Or mentally retarded? Or diabetics?

That would be called a pre-existing condition, I think. It is not legal to deny them coverage or, I guess, charge them more, since they are not charging them more. But yes, they should pay more. Until last year, they were charged more, since that is a medical condition that has health consequences. To do otherwise is to encourage an unhealthy lifestyle and reward it.
 
TiAkkFn.jpg


ZYzm5OK.jpg



It's a matter of education. People who are uneducated are more fat because they do not live a progressive health lifestyle which inherently comes from education.

Such is why you see a great deal of conservative politicians who are fat. They don't live progressive health lifestyles.

ztk30in.jpg

So being a conservative is bad for ones health? Thats a new one on me.

I think that not too long ago I read that college graduates are actually less likely to self identify as being a conservative than high school dropouts.

EDIT: I just looked it up, people with "some" college are most likely to be conservatives however people with a graduate degree are least likely to be conservatives. High school grads with no college are equally split, and high school dropouts are pretty much like people with graduate degrees (most likely to be liberal).
 
Last edited:
TiAkkFn.jpg


ZYzm5OK.jpg



It's a matter of education. People who are uneducated are more fat because they do not live a progressive health lifestyle which inherently comes from education.

Such is why you see a great deal of conservative politicians who are fat. They don't live progressive health lifestyles.

ztk30in.jpg

There is no link. I don't know WHAT kind of website you picked that up from. :roll:
 
Yes. He is.

gUHP8n1.jpg

poMjHEQ.jpg

I don't think he looks obese at all. He has a little bit of a gut, but he certainly is not "obese." His arms, legs, etc. are NOT fat at all.
 
Maybe that's a good argument for sin taxes on food that leads to poor health. We could tax the heck out of sugar, and any food that has more than X% of it's calories from fat. Now since I eat a fairly healthy diet, it wouldn't effect me much, and I wouldn't really mind occasionally paying an extra buck or two for a cheat meal box of cookies, but it would be a pretty stiff disincentive for other people to excessively eat bad food. The revenues could then be used to fund a special insurance pool, or better yet, to help fund universal major medical insurance.

It seems better to me to charge people for being fat by charging them more for over consuming what makes them fat, rather than to try to figure out who's poor health is due to bad eating habits. That way we are helping to prevent fat related illness, rather than just having to figure out how to pay for the illness.

Except that it's a misconception that most people are obese because of chips & doughnuts. Those often play a part, but often it's pounds that creep on over the years. A few hundred extra calories a day (one extra serving of fries, or one burger instead of a chicken sandwich, or too large a helping of dinner) might result in 75 pounds of fat over the years. All without doughnuts.

The only foods that don't lead to obesity are low calories vegetables and fresh or frozen fruit without sugar. Are you suggesting a tax on ALL foods except those, even though most people don't get fat from chicken or mashed potatoes?
 
Here's a little bit of text from my post because I'm quite SURE that OP is not reading any links. Make sense? It does to me.

Fewer opportunities for physical activity.

Lower income neighborhoods have fewer physical activity resources than higher income neighborhoods, including fewer parks, green spaces, bike paths, and recreational facilities, making it difficult to lead a physically active lifestyle (Estabrooks et al., 2003; Moore et al., 2008; Powell et al., 2004). Research shows that limited access to such resources is a risk factor for obesity (Gordon-Larsen et al., 2006; Sallis & Glanz, 2009; Singh et al., 2010b).
When available, physical activity resources may not be attractive places to play or be physically active because poor neighborhoods often have fewer natural features (e.g., trees), more visible signs of trash and disrepair, and more noise (Neckerman et al., 2009).
Crime, traffic, and unsafe playground equipment are common barriers to physical activity in low-income communities (Duke et al., 2003; Gordon-Larsen et al., 2004; Neckerman et al., 2009; Suecoff et al., 1999). Because of these and other safety concerns, children and adults alike are more likely to stay indoors and engage in sedentary activities, such as watching television or playing video games. Not surprisingly, those living in unsafe neighborhoods are at greater risk for obesity (Duncan et al., 2009; Lumeng et al., 2006; Singh et al., 2010b).
Low-income children are less likely to participate in organized sports (Duke et al., 2003). This is consistent with reports by low-income parents that expense and transportation problems are barriers to their children’s participation in physical activities (Duke et al., 2003).
Students in low-income schools spend less time being active during physical education classes and are less likely to have recess, both of which are of great concern given the already limited opportunities for physical activity in their communities (Barros et al., 2009; UCLA Center to Eliminate Health Disparities, 2009).
Cycles of food deprivation and overeating.

Those who are eating less or skipping meals to stretch food budgets may overeat when food does become available, resulting in chronic ups and downs in food intake that can contribute to weight gain (Bruening et al., 2012; Dammann & Smith, 2010; Ma et al., 2003; Olson et al., 2007; Smith & Richards, 2008). Cycles of food restriction or deprivation also can lead to an unhealthy preoccupation with food and metabolic changes that promote fat storage – all the worse when in combination with overeating (Alaimo et al., 2001; Dietz, 1995; Finney Rutten et al., 2010; Polivy, 1996). Unfortunately, overconsumption is even easier given the availability of cheap, energy-dense foods in low-income communities (Drewnowski, 2009; Drewnowski & Specter, 2004).
The “feast or famine” situation is especially a problem for low-income parents, particularly mothers, who often restrict their food intake and sacrifice their own nutrition in order to protect their children from hunger (Basiotis & Lino, 2002; Dammann & Smith, 2009; Dietz, 1995; Edin et al., 2013; McIntyre et al., 2003). Such a coping mechanism puts them at risk for obesity – and research shows that parental obesity, especially maternal obesity, is in turn a strong predictor of childhood obesity (Davis et al., 2008; Janjua et al., 2012; Whitaker, 2004).
High levels of stress.

Low-income families, including children, may face high levels of stress due to the financial and emotional pressures of food insecurity, low-wage work, lack of access to health care, inadequate and long-distance transportation, poor housing, neighborhood violence, and other factors. Research has linked stress to obesity in youth and adults, including (for adults) stress from job-related demands and difficulty paying bills (Block et al., 2009; Gundersen et al., 2011; Lohman et al., 2009; Moore & Cunningham, 2012). Stress may lead to weight gain through stress-induced hormonal and metabolic changes as well as unhealthful eating behaviors (Adam & Epel, 2007; Torres & Nowson, 2007). Stress, particularly chronic stress, also may trigger anxiety and depression, which are both associated with child and adult obesity (Anderson et al., 2007; Simon et al., 2006).
Greater exposure to marketing of obesity-promoting products.

Low-income youth and adults are exposed to disproportionately more marketing and advertising for obesity-promoting products that encourage the consumption of unhealthful foods and discourage physical activity (e.g., fast food, sugary beverages, television shows, video games) (Institute of Medicine, 2013; Kumanyika & Grier, 2006; Lewis et al., 2005; Yancey et al., 2009). Such advertising has a particularly strong influence on the preferences, diets, and purchases of children, who are the targets of many marketing efforts (Institute of Medicine, 2006; Institute of Medicine, 2013).
 
Except that it's a misconception that most people are obese because of chips & doughnuts. Those often play a part, but often it's pounds that creep on over the years. A few hundred extra calories a day (one extra serving of fries, or one burger instead of a chicken sandwich, or too large a helping of dinner) might result in 75 pounds of fat over the years. All without doughnuts.

The only foods that don't lead to obesity are low calories vegetables and fresh or frozen fruit without sugar. Are you suggesting a tax on ALL foods except those, even though most people don't get fat from chicken or mashed potatoes?

That would tend to support my argument for sin taxes on bad food then. If a McFatties hamburger cost $2 more than a broiled chicken sandwich on whole wheat bread, many people, over the course of their lives, would be more likely to chose the healthier option, and thus less likely to pack on a few pounds a year.

Again, it's just a matter of taxing food that has added sugar and lots of fat, while not taxing "better" foods, as to economically incentivize our population to make better choices, even if they are unaware that those cheaper choices are also healthier choices.
 
How do you know? :lol: Have you done some polling recently? All I know is that I type for a trauma center in California, and I type about patients who are seriously hurting. I mean SERIOUSLY hurting. Automobile accidents are common and they really, really mess you up bad.

Do you honestly believe that the third of Americans that are clinically obese have all experienced some sort of tramatic injury? That's ridiculous.
 
Do you honestly believe that the third of Americans that are clinically obese have all experienced some sort of tramatic injury? That's ridiculous.

Of course not, and I didn't say that. I said it's more common that you probably think. I type about them EVERY DAY.
 
Here's a little bit of text from my post because I'm quite SURE that OP is not reading any links. Make sense? It does to me.
. The majority of my runs and many of my rides are through lower income areas. We should stop making excuses for poor personal health choices.
 
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?"
This is a load of BS. Other than a very small percentage of people with thyroid and or other same type issues it is 100% the individuals who is overweight responsibility. I see the exact same tv ads as well as smell the smells coming from fast food places. But I know that if I eat that crap I will put on weight. I also know if I don't workout most every day I will put on weight. So I make the personal choice to not buy that crap and I don't buy it for my kids. It is that easy. Saying that it is not the individual who is buying the craps fault because that food is tempting is total crap. It is called personal responsibility
 
. The majority of my runs and many of my rides are through lower income areas. We should stop making excuses for poor personal health choices.

Point is, most of these people aren't going to be able to afford to pay extra for their healthcare. Are you aware that black people are more prone to hypertension, diabetes AND obesity? Are you going to charge black people more insurance than Asian people, who have a lower risk? These are the things you are going to start getting into. You MUST think of the unintentional effects.
 
Of course not, and I didn't say that. I said it's more common that you probably think. I type about them EVERY DAY.



Lol that post would be the greatest argument for why the medically judged obese should pay more. "I type about them EVERY DAY."


Wow we are so screwed as a society.. Lmao.. I cannot stop laughing..:lamo

 
Yes. He is.

gUHP8n1.jpg

poMjHEQ.jpg

I wouldn't call that guy obese! If he is, every professional football player can be called obese, when they're just big muscular guys. He doesn't have jowls or rolls of fat. Look at the difference in height between him and the man behind him.

Greetings, Ryan5. :2wave:
 
Lol that post would be the greatest argument for why the medically judged obese should pay more. "I type about them EVERY DAY."


Wow we are so screwed as a society.. Lmao.. I cannot stop laughing..:lamo



I was talking about car accident victims with limited mobility, or no mobility.
 
I wouldn't call that guy obese! If he is, every professional football player can be called obese, when they're just big muscular guys. He doesn't have jowls or rolls of fat. Look at the difference in height between him and the man behind him.

Greetings, Ryan5. :2wave:

I actually prefer that body type than a skinny little boy body. :lol: He looks kind of cuddly and warm to me.
 
Point is, most of these people aren't going to be able to afford to pay extra for their healthcare. Are you aware that black people are more prone to hypertension, diabetes AND obesity? Are you going to charge black people more insurance than Asian people, who have a lower risk? These are the things you are going to start getting into. You MUST think of the unintentional effects.

Do you realize that the reason for those differences between blacks and Asians is almost entirely attributable to diet?
 
Do you realize that the reason for those differences between blacks and Asians is almost entirely attributable to diet?

That is besides the point. The African American obesity rates are the highest. That's the point.
 
I actually prefer that body type than a skinny little boy body. :lol: He looks kind of cuddly and warm to me.

He looks healthy to me - plus anybody that likes ice cream cones is okay by me, too, since he is enjoying life! :mrgreen:

Greetings, ChrisL. :2wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom