Fat Shaming.

[Chairman Miaow]

snip

If weight gain/loss is down to genetics how do you explain that obesity is such a recent epidemic?

Never before has food been available in such quantities at such low cost to so many who live life styles where obesity isn't instantly crippling. Never before have the circumstances been correct for the trait to express in large portions of the population.

Often hereditary traits require the right environment to express. For example, lactose intolerance only expresses in the presence of lactose. You would never know the difference otherwise. This is one of the most basic principles of genetics.

And it isn't all genetics or whatever, but that does have a far more significant role to play than people tend to think. In most cases the disadvantage can be overcome, but pretending the disadvantage does not exist or that it is minor for most people who struggle to maintain a healthy weight is ignorant.

and acting like it's the difference between healthy weight and an extra 20 kilos of fat is insulting. Time and again people who claim it's just their genetics are shown to just not understand how much they are eating/drinking. And the argument put forth by a lot of these people isn't "My genetics are bad so I gain weight more easily" it's "My genetics are bad so I weigh the same as a baby elephant.

 

[sumanoskae]

and i never claimed these two equalities, so not sure why you are pointing it out. No, by my logic you will be fat if your calory intake is higher than the amount of calories you burn. obviously, the athlete burns more calories so they will be less fat.

Like i said in a previuos reply, i do not agree with their food waste arguments.

So then what point of mine are you arguing against? That was the sole point of my comment. I don't recall making any other point besides the fact that fat people are not necessarily wasteful.

 

[WolfThomas]

I would argue that 'socialized medicine' would actually encourage less healthy behavior. If you're the one footing the bill for a health issue, there's a deincentive (is that what you call it?) to have that health issue. If it's coming out of taxpayer money, people will essentially treat it as free, since the direct consequence on them is ultimately minimal. In other words, people are less likely to be healthy if they know someone else is going to pay to fix it.

I disagree completely. "Socialized medicine" allows a person to visit a doctor cheaply or freely for preventive medicine. Things like getting their blood pressure checked, their cholesterol and blood sugar. Visits to Dietitians, Exercise Physiologists and other Allied health can be organised with partial or full subsidization of costs. Metabolic or endocrine causes of obesity can be excluded. Medications for assistance to quit smoking can be subsidized. If all else fails they an get onto a wait list for bariatric surgery they may never have been able to afford otherwise.

If you're paying out of pocket, things that don't actively make you feel sick or aren't going to immediately kill you aren't going to seem important. Blood pressure, cholesterol and impaired glucose tolerance are all mostly invisible until you have a stroke, heart attach or develop complications of diabetes.

Edit:

Also in socialized countries most people still don't want to be sick. They may be supported better financially, but it still impairs their ability to work (and earn money) and the overall quality of their life.

 

[Gengisgame]

TC is people shaming, calling people shitty like that, most people are decent, the crap they do or the crap people in general just seem to stand out.