The Economics of Obesity

Saw this at the Chronicle. Direct link:


http://www.thepublicinterest.com/

I find it sad that many people worry about the car they drive, the prestige of the college they attend, and the amount of money they earn.

Yet they let their health go down the tubes.



Just my opinion

 

You may also want to check out a recent Time special edition on obesity. Research is starting to show that obesity is not a simple matter of pushing away from the table. Studies are showing support that body mechanisms leading to obesity were a requirement for survival eons ago. Thin people simply could not survive because they could not store enough energy to get through the lean times. However, we no longer need to expend so much energy to survive, but our bodies don't know this yet. We still crave things (fats, sweets) we needed for survival. However, instead of finding a honey comb every few months, or bagging an occasional animal with a fat content of 6% (compared to our farm raised animals of 34%), we just go to the store.

That said, we no longer need to store fat for survival. It may be we are undergoing a small evolutionary step. Perhaps now that we now have the means to keep even perpetually skinny people alive, we will find this body type to become more prevalent, as obese people die off- perhaps before they contribute to the gene pool.

Russ

(Graduated grade school at 192#, went to 150# in high school- ended up hospitalized. Graduated high school at 242, balooned up to excess of 350#, dropped to 227 pounds. Slowly gained to 283# over the next 15 years, then recently came back down to 240#)

 

Studies by The Public Interest are usually very biased and poor/junk science...being that they are a socialist propaganda organization.

Go further into the title of the post and you will have your answer why this happens (but you must take economics as in its true meaning; the study of choices and human action not the study of money or business, etc).

This is not a problem in that if I were obese I would not be placing any cost on others and their opinions of my appearance is their opinion. Although it would put some cost on my family. But in general it only becomes a problem to others when the gov't starts taking our money from us and paying others to take care of me because I am fat. So the problem tends not to be my obesity but that the gov't makes it the problem of everyone when they take our money away from us and gives it to others.

 

It's a problem just like smoking. If you are in an HMO and obese, you will incur more expenses then a non-obese person. If you don't have health insurance or means and are obese, that's when the government has to step in because we don't let people die in the streets.

 

And teetotalers have more strokes than social drinkers. Perhaps we should ban Baptists for leading an unhealthy lifestyle. What about high risk sexual activity? What about driving?

I am not sure why some individuals are determined to cure what they see as defects in others.

 

So in other words Khan if I do not live the lifestyle that you agree with then it is appropriate to have the governement come in an force me to live how you wish? So basically the thin or non-fat people are right and the fat people are wrong. What about the natural body builders who think thin people and fat people are not as healthy as they and then they can have the gov't force all these people to hit the gyms and attain a certain muscle mass? What about the people who have low IQs? We cannot have low IQ people dying in our streets...do I hear coerced brain transplant.

So where is the freedom in your view Khan? I certainly see none from your point of view...freedom to succeed also means freedom to fail.

 

Oh, well, you've got to die of something...

 

And the point has been raised elsewhere that people with unhealthy lifestyles save society money by dying younger before the onset of chronic diseases and do not require retirement support.

 

This isn't about what I think or my lifestyle. This about the economic argument. Is it fair to make all of us pay higher prices on health insurance premiums or more in taxes to cover the cost of one group whose lifestyle has been proven to be unhealthy?
I don't like to pay more but I'm not sure if it's fair to single them out, as you and others are pointing out. It's an interesting problem.

 

Is it fair for you to have to pay taxes to support ethnic minorities that do not pay their share of taxes?

How many segments do we really want to break society into?

 

My grandfather smoked like a smokestack and drank like a fish. Yet he managed to outlive his first wife by 36 years. She never touched a cigarette or a glass of sherry yet she was always sick and a burden on the health care system. Go figure.

 

I agree with you. Where does it end? I see perky slim women at the gym I use getting breast implants. Yet a look at the FDA Breast Implant Consumer Handbook 2004:

http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/breastimplants/handbook2004/introduction.html

Go figure!

Just my opinion

 

I will agree being overweight is a health issue. It puts a strain on parts of the body. However, if one has a natural propensity towards being overweight, I am not sure battling it to extreme measures is all that healthy, either. And, as nosborne said- we all die of something.

While I was not comfortable at 350+ pounds, I also found I was not comfortable when I was really thin. I am comfortable now. My choleserol is fine, sugar good, etc. Healthy BP and heart rate. I exercise, and try to stay active. I have a family member- looks healthy, stays slim, but needs meds to keep cholseterol down from 280+. She exercises, eats 'healthy', and yet she needs the meds.

I've wondered about the economies involved with solving societal ills. Is it in the self interests for people working within a system to battle a societal ill, such as poverty or crime, to actually have a solution to solve that particular ill? What would the side effects be if all obesity were wiped out? There would be no need for research, the pill market would dry up, likely less of a need for liposuction and heart bypass operations, so the medical world would get a small hit. What about farmers? How would it affect them? Would they take an altruistic route to ease world hunger? And what would the side effects of that be? HMOs would need to find something else to worry about and demand (full body condoms to prevent the spread of germs from personal contact, perhaps?).

It would be an interesting study.

 

If he smoked like a smokestack, I'm sure there was enough smoke around for the both of them to inhale. It certainly makes me sick to be around smokers.

 

His first wife hated his smoking habit. She insisted that he smoke out side of their home. Nonetheless, I'm sure the second hand smoke did some damage to her already fragile health.

 

There should be a fatties tax. Anyone XX lbs/kgs over should get taxed. Just like cigarettes and alcohol are taxed.

 

The taxes should be levied on fast food chains like McDonalds. If you eat their food every day for a month, you'll gain 20 - 25lbs.

 

That would be like taxing the producers of tobacco and alcohol and not the consumers. People don´t have to eat junk food. The fat people are going to get fat regardless of where they buy their food. I say tax them. They are the problem.

 

I'm a creature of habit. Every night while I'm working, I go to McDonald's and get a grilled chicken Caeser salad for dinner. It's very good, especially with the Paul Newman dressing. I could just as easily order a Big Mac, Quarter Pounder w/cheese, or some other artery-blocking menu selection, but I don't.

So....I have eaten at McDonald's every day for way more than a month, and I haven't gained a pound. Quite the opposite...my uniform pants are feeling a bit too big lately.

Taxing fast-food places like McDonald's is completely insane. Why should they be punished for the poor choices of their customers? As I mentioned, I go there almost every night, and I have yet to have anyone even suggest that I should substitute my salad for a high-fat burger. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact.

This is just another crazy idea that people shouldn't be responsible for their own actions.

 

Well said Bruce.