Quantcast

Look out Fatty...

Spero

ass rainbow
Jul 12, 2005
2,072
0
Tejas
Those must be some damned expensive 4 and 7 years.

The researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.

On average, healthy people lived 84 years. Smokers lived about 77 years, and obese people lived about 80 years. Smokers and obese people tended to have more heart disease than the healthy people.
 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
40,942
13,135
Portland, OR
You do have that right, but I think you should pay more in health care premiums to compensate for said fattiness.
But what about the positive effect I have on the economy by supporting local businesses? If I spend an average of $10 per visit vs. the "normal" $5 someone else spends at McDonalds, then that more than makes up for it, right?
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
If we ignore the fact these figures are from a different population with a number of differences in variables, give no economic value to quality of life, make no adjustments for changes in design and infrastructure to accommodate larger people, and that, "from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs." we see:

-smokers cost 22% less over their lifetime
-obese cost 11% less over their lifetime

Smokers and obese are affected by and die of various forms of CVD. We also know that:

-Approx 25% of all US healthcare cost are from CVD (approx 1/2 trillion out of the 2 trillion spent on all healthcare annually in the US)

Therefore this article does not apply.
 

cadmus

Monkey
May 24, 2006
755
0
PNW
I guess if it doesn't support your point of view, it can't be applicable. Maybe if they'd mentioned CVD more?

And you forgot to site your sources. The best I can give you is a B-
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
I guess if it doesn't support your point of view, it can't be applicable.
If we stop addressing people with any health problem we'd also see a reduction in healthcare costs - its not rocket science.

Regardless ignoring health care problems does not improve health or provide a remotely acceptable solution to reduction healthcare costs.

Medicare[if it wasn't broken] would address the old age costs. For the Dutch, the time period when people are personally paying for their own health insurance obesity costs more (if their medical system was the same as ours).

Here some info. from the CDC, these numbers paint a worse picture than the other source I saw a few months ago. Does not include costs from other major health problems related to obesity (diabetes) or smoking (cancer, various respiratory illnesses, secondhand smoke, and complications in pregnancy) :

[url=http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/AAG/dhdsp.htm]CDC[/url] said:
Heart Disease and Stroke: The Nation’s Leading Killers
Deaths, Disability, and Cost

Heart disease and stroke are the most common cardiovascular diseases. They are the first and third leading causes of death for both men and women in the United States, accounting for nearly 40% of all annual deaths. More than 1.4 million Americans die of cardiovascular diseases each year, which is 1 death every 36 seconds. Although these largely preventable conditions are more common among people aged 65 or older, the number of sudden deaths from heart disease among people aged 15–34 has increased.

In addition, more than 79 million Americans currently live with a cardiovascular disease. For example, coronary heart disease is a leading cause of premature, permanent disability in the U.S. workforce. Stroke alone accounts for disability in nearly 1 million Americans. More than 6 million hospitalizations
each year are because of cardiovascular diseases.

The economic impact of cardiovascular diseases on our nation’s health care system continues to grow as the population ages. The cost of heart disease and stroke in the United States is projected to be $431.8 billion in 2007, including health care expenditures and lost productivity from death and disability.
Risk Factors Must Be Addressed

Two of the major independent risk factors for cardiovascular diseases are high blood pressure and high blood cholesterol.

* In 2004, nearly 1 in 3 U.S. adults had high blood pressure (hypertension), and 37.4% (about 42 million people) had prehypertension, defined as a systolic pressure of 120–139 mm Hg or a diastolic pressure of 80–89 mm Hg.

* For 2007, the estimated national direct and indirect cost for high blood pressure was $66.4 billion.

* High blood pressure was listed as a primary or contributing cause of death in more than 11% of U.S. deaths in 2003.

* About 105 million U.S. adults have cholesterol levels of 200 mg/dL or higher, which exceed the Healthy People 2010 objective of <200 mg/dL.

* A 10% decrease in total cholesterol levels in the U.S. population overall may result in an estimated 30% reduction in the incidence of coronary heart disease.
 

manimal

Ociffer Tackleberry
Feb 27, 2002
7,212
17
Blindly running into cactus
* A 10% decrease in total cholesterol levels in the U.S. population overall may result in an estimated 30% reduction in the incidence of coronary heart disease.
wow, so perhaps the focus should be on restricting the ingredients in food rather than trying to mess with free will on the part of the obese. if the government can regulate cigarettes in regards to tar and carcinogens then why can't they regulate the amount of fat/cholestoral in resteraunt food? for instance, something to the sound of a 12 grams of fat maximum per individual item (which is still 1/3 of the average large cheeseburger). this doesn't seem too far stretched and would help to wene americans off of the fat addiction while decreasing the cholestoral/fat intake of the average fast food junkie w/out actually making them feel like a leper in Roman times.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
wow, so perhaps the focus should be on restricting the ingredients in food rather than trying to mess with free will on the part of the obese. if the government can regulate cigarettes in regards to tar and carcinogens then why can't they regulate the amount of fat/cholestoral in resteraunt food? for instance, something to the sound of a 12 grams of fat maximum per individual item (which is still 1/3 of the average large cheeseburger). this doesn't seem too far stretched and would help to wene americans off of the fat addiction while decreasing the cholestoral/fat intake of the average fast food junkie w/out actually making them feel like a leper in Roman times.
They've done that in a way in NYC with fat, makes a lot more sense than what they want to do in MS but not as controversial/argument worthy.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/cardio/cardio-transfat.shtml
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
wow, so perhaps the focus should be on restricting the ingredients in food rather than trying to mess with free will on the part of the obese. if the government can regulate cigarettes in regards to tar and carcinogens then why can't they regulate the amount of fat/cholestoral in resteraunt food? for instance, something to the sound of a 12 grams of fat maximum per individual item (which is still 1/3 of the average large cheeseburger). this doesn't seem too far stretched and would help to wene americans off of the fat addiction while decreasing the cholestoral/fat intake of the average fast food junkie w/out actually making them feel like a leper in Roman times.

I dont know Manimal, I sure as hell don't want some some politician deciding WTF I need to be eating...and it's not like people become obese, exclusively from eating at restaurants...surely there's a few bags of doritos per week and a few boxes of little debbie cakes contributing. And I'll be goddamned if Id allow some politician to really influence what's available at the grocery, and deny me some bratwurst or something because he feels he knows what's best for me. Basically, just keep the effing gov't out of my life.
Do you really feel like busting in on some family and cuffing them for eating cheez whiz? Haha.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
I dont know Manimal, I sure as hell don't want some some politician deciding WTF I need to be eating...and it's not like people become obese, exclusively from eating at restaurants...surely there's a few bags of doritos per week and a few boxes of little debbie cakes contributing. And I'll be goddamned if Id allow some politician to really influence what's available at the grocery, and deny me some bratwurst or something because he feels he knows what's best for me. Basically, just keep the effing gov't out of my life.
Do you really feel like busting in on some family and cuffing them for eating cheez whiz? Haha.
Thats less palpable to you than the government taking away our basic rights, creating huge debt, torturing, abusing our military in war for falsely inflated threat of terrorism?

The food industry with their various trends with portions, transfats, and other harmful artificial ingredients used to extended the bottom line probably contributes to magnitudes more deaths in the US than terrorism worldwide.

Hell if we tightened up the war on drunk driving in the US we'd probably save more lives than US lose from terrorism annual - that would have saved us a ton.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Thats less palpable to you than the government taking away our basic rights, creating huge debt, torturing, abusing our military in war for falsely inflated threat of terrorism?

The food industry with their various trends with portions, transfats, and other harmful artificial ingredients used to extended the bottom line probably contributes to magnitudes more deaths in the US than terrorism worldwide.

Hell if we tightened up the war on drunk driving in the US we'd probably save more lives than US lose from terrorism annual - that would have saved us a ton.
WTF are you talking about?
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Effectiveness of government regulation of food vs. any other regulations they've done that effect our lives.
So you're saying that somehow, since they've managed to **** up everything else, they're somehow going to be more effective at managing proper diets for everyone in the country?
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
So you're saying that somehow, since they've manage to **** up everything else, they're somehow going to be more effective at managing proper diets for everyone in the country?
I am saying its a real, established, and significant problem that affects America and the Western World on a much larger scale. Isn't it more worthy of action?
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
I am saying its a real, established, and significant problem that affects America and the Western World on a much larger scale. Isn't it more worthy of action?
Ok fine, let's just have them work that into the patriot act with the rest of our personal freedoms and give "personal accountability" a final kick in the head before it dies.
 

Serial Midget

Al Bundy
Jun 25, 2002
13,053
1,896
Fort of Rio Grande
My great grandmother lived to be 95 - 10 of her last years where spent in a special care unit at something like 15 grand a month.

My great grand father lived until he was 85 - he had a stroke one day and dies the next.

Neither smoke, drank or was obese - kind of a crap shot, this dying thing.
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
My great grandmother lived to be 95 - 10 of her last years where spent in a special care unit at something like 15 grand a month.

My great grand father lived until he was 85 - he had a stroke one day and dies the next.

Neither smoke, drank or was obese - kind of a crap shot, this dying thing.
Nobody claims a non-smoking person at a healthy weight lives forever or are immune to disease - environment and genetics both play a role. The modern obesity epidemic and its related problems aren't genetic.

A large body of modern research show moderate alcohol consumption is good for your health, so not drinking isn't a great thing.