"Reducing obesity to 1980 levels will save Medicare $1 trillion." -- Barack Obama
Now a new study, as reported by Junkfood Science, calculates that reducing obesity actually costs governments more money in the long run.
What the study really points out, says JS, is the ridiculousness of coming up with such estimates in the first place. And I would add, the moral sledgehammer of using them in sound bytes, to make points that truly do not exist.
We've already had a president who fudges with spectacular ease and seeks to impose his own moral code on all of us. Please, let's not have another.**
**Oh, wait, do any of the candidates pass this test?
12 comments:
I don't think any of the candidates are remotely good on fat, and HRC has certainly said a bunch of things (or recruited Bill to say them) that make me want to scream. But I'm voting for her anyway.
Oh, wait, do any of the candidates pass this test?
No.
Clinton's and Obama's plans are remarkably similar in almost every detail, including hanging a lot of their supposed savings on improved preventive care. But my sense -- and I have read both plans and a lot of peripheral material -- is that both want increased funding for and focus on preventive care (and that includes just making it possible for people to afford regular checkups), not mandatory preventive care. They're both incorrect to assume that weight loss is de facto preventive, but you can't really blame them with the misinformation out there -- they're running for president, they haven't got time to second-guess the "obesity epidemic."
I think Huckabee (is he still running?) would be the worst with this, since he himself lost a lot of weight in some government weight-loss program, and has written a book about it.
I don't think America can get a president who isn't anti-fat, at this time. Most people are way too saturated in the "fat is bad" rhetoric. Maybe one of the bloggers should run for president?
I'm voting for Obama because I think he still has some ideals left, and he has good ideas about transparnency in government which I really like. The whole Bush Clinton Bush Clinton thing would just be too dynastical for words.
Though it saddens me that I cannot support the first woman presidential candidate.
Huckabee may have had weight loss surgery, making him the worst on fat. Not because he had the surgery but because he doesn't cop to it, if indeed he had it.
I get the Clinton-Bush dynasty thing, and I'm not thrilled with Hillary 100% either, but she's got my vote a) because she's a woman, b) because she's got experience, and c) because I think she's the only Democratic candidate left with the chops to handle the kind of gigundo disaster we're going to have come 1/20/09, thanks to the father and son Bush idiots.
They need a Minister of Fat, I tell you.
Huckabee's worst by a long shot, because not only does he have the sanctimonious ex-fattie thing going on, but he's a Republican, which means that he thinks the free market will totally save health care. WHICH HAS BEEN WORKING SO VERY WELL SO FAR.
Under Huckabee, we're likely to get nagged about our weight AND have continued or increased inability to get insurance. Luckily his campaign's viability was a flash in the pan.
Obama, "the skinny kid with the funny name" has probably never had a concern in his life about weight. Because of this I imagine that he is unaware, as I was before a month ago, of the FA movement. I imagine that he would stand up for the constitutional rights of all people, regardless of size, and that he would listen to criticism from those who take offense at his comment about getting obesity rates back where they were in 1980.
What we need is a president who can think, lead, inspire, listen, and react.
I'm voting for Obama.
I am voting for Clinton because hen i was 7 years old i told my grandpa i wanted to be president. he told me I couldn't because I was a girl.
Lets just hope whoever wins finds a way to make going to get a check affordable. I am a grad student and can't afford to go
Interestingly, a bunch of researchers just did a study that shows fat people are cheaper on a nationalized health system than thin people.
So he's, like, wrong. But such a pretty empty suit...
No, none of them gets it.
And I hate B. Clinton for running around telling school kids that if they don't slim down, they'll die. He seems obsessed with the idea that his modest spare tire was to blame for his heart attack, whereas his family history of early heart disease and his lifelong tendency to short himself on sleep were nonfactors. And I'm pretty sure his wife's views on fat pretty much mirror his own.
But Obama has been harping on fat in debates more than H. Clinton has. And if he doesn't stop, I may have no choice but to vote for her. I am sick of being demonized in order to drum up applause. I suppose if we reduced longevity to 1980 rates, it would save a bundle, too, not to mention forget about every medication and procedure that's been invented since then.
You can't have it both ways. If you want the entire population to live to be 95 years old, it's going to cost you. It doesn't matter if there isn't a single fat person on earth.
There's nothing like a reformed fattie, is there?
Meowser, I love that last graf. That's worth an entire post right there. Wanna guest blog for me?
Sure, Harriet! E me about it, okay?
Post a Comment