Why it is acceptable to criticize smokers, but not fat people?

Brawndo

New member
Jun 29, 2010
2,165
0
0
huser said:
Compelling data, here's more.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/

The long and short of it, tobacco products as of 2000-2004 cost $193 Billion, with $96 billion in health care costs.

Second hand smoke costs 10 BILLION.

So while smoking might cost less than preventable diseases related to obesity, 10 BILLION dollars lost because complete bystanders had health issues sorta makes smokers villains even if we are simply using cold equations to quantify even a SINGLE person dying because some a-hole decides to go through a pack a day.

And of course the fallacy that every health related issue of diseases associated with obesity would disappear if everyone was super fit. Heart attacks, strokes, and diabetes would obviously still occur even among that hypothetical cohort. Much less prevalent? Sure.

And I normally go on the side of addressing increasing obesity, but smokers DO as a group suck for their poor health choices.
I absolutely agree smoking affects our health costs, but there is already a strong anti-smoking campaign underway in the United States. I don't see an equally big one telling Americans to stop drinking soda (which is the biggest source of sugar and empty calories) or something similar.
 

huser

New member
Jul 8, 2011
35
0
0
Brawndo said:
huser said:
Compelling data, here's more.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/

The long and short of it, tobacco products as of 2000-2004 cost $193 Billion, with $96 billion in health care costs.

Second hand smoke costs 10 BILLION.

So while smoking might cost less than preventable diseases related to obesity, 10 BILLION dollars lost because complete bystanders had health issues sorta makes smokers villains even if we are simply using cold equations to quantify even a SINGLE person dying because some a-hole decides to go through a pack a day.

And of course the fallacy that every health related issue of diseases associated with obesity would disappear if everyone was super fit. Heart attacks, strokes, and diabetes would obviously still occur even among that hypothetical cohort. Much less prevalent? Sure.

And I normally go on the side of addressing increasing obesity, but smokers DO as a group suck for their poor health choices.
I absolutely agree smoking affects our health costs. But if illnesses from second-hand smoke costs us $10 billion a year extra in health care costs, then preventable obesity-related illnesses will cost 4-6 times that each year by 2030, to the tune of $48-66 billion a year.

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110826192438.htm
Uh missing the point ENTIRELY. The 10 Billion isn't just wood thrown on a fire. It's not just money paid by people who didn't choose to smoke as people who aren't obese paying for increasing obesity. It's PEOPLE DYING because people around them chose to smoke. That's secondhand assault or murder not secondhand robbery. The difference between the two should then be obvious.

Also, you can't ignore the 96 BILLION tobacco use takes just in healthcare costs on ACTUAL tobacco users that by your construct must also be factored into our group healthcare. And this after literal decades of slamming on smokers and their behavior.

So I'm with you on addressing obesity both in my own interests as well as an overall interest in the health of my neighbors, but smokers are (again as a group, not talking about anyone's specific use case) villains.
 

z121231211

New member
Jun 24, 2008
765
0
0
MelasZepheos said:
Or they don't have the money to go to the gym.
What about just running outside or doing push-ups or something?
MelasZepheos said:
Or they work a full time job and don't have the time to go for a run after or before work.
I don't know what draconian hours you have, but if it's less than 14 hours/day, 7 days a week, you can find time to exercise.
MelasZepheos said:
Or it's cheaper for them to buy junk food (which is still cheaper than vegetables and healthy food, by quite a considerable difference)
Gaining weight is just eating more calories than you burn, so even without exercise you could just eat less of whatever you usually eat and still lose weight.
MelasZepheos said:
Choice is an odd word, and one you should think about very carefully before using. I have never in my life made a conscious decision to be overweight, whereas you must have made a conscious decision to be 'fit' as you call it. So really you're the one who made the choice, I just ignored it because I'm happy the way I am. And why can't you accept that?
You made the choice to eat more calories than you burn, therefor you chose to be fat. There's nothing wrong with that (unless you're unhealthily obese), but please understand that it was a choice and that no one else made you fat except yourself, even if the intention of eating was to satisfy immediate hunger rather than "I'll just become overweight!"
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,503
0
0
Brawndo said:
huser said:
Compelling data, here's more.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/

The long and short of it, tobacco products as of 2000-2004 cost $193 Billion, with $96 billion in health care costs.

Second hand smoke costs 10 BILLION.

So while smoking might cost less than preventable diseases related to obesity, 10 BILLION dollars lost because complete bystanders had health issues sorta makes smokers villains even if we are simply using cold equations to quantify even a SINGLE person dying because some a-hole decides to go through a pack a day.

And of course the fallacy that every health related issue of diseases associated with obesity would disappear if everyone was super fit. Heart attacks, strokes, and diabetes would obviously still occur even among that hypothetical cohort. Much less prevalent? Sure.

And I normally go on the side of addressing increasing obesity, but smokers DO as a group suck for their poor health choices.
I absolutely agree smoking affects our health costs, but there is already a strong anti-smoking campaign underway in the United States. I don't see an equally big one telling Americans to stop drinking soda (which is the biggest source of sugar and empty calories) or something similar.
the more I think about it, the more I think it has to do with interest groups/lobbyist that would not like to see campaigns against the products their trying to sell. Just look at the recent act to help make school children more healthy. It was met with congress declaring pizza a vegetable! (lmao pizza=/=vegetable)
 

WeAreStevo

New member
Sep 22, 2011
449
0
0
Smokers cost money as a result of health related issues as well as fat people do.

The difference I suppose is that where second hand smoke can cause problems with people nearby, there is no comparative quality with fat people (second hand eating? Eating the last crispy chicken at KFC maybe?)

Regardless, smokers are treated unfairly sometimes, but other times I think it's completely justified.

An example:

No smoking in restaurants in California. I agree, I don't want to inhale smoke while I'm eating. Just because some people smoke in their house doesn't mean I should be subjected to it while I am enjoying my food.

Vs.

No smoking anywhere on campus on most CSU schools. This I don't get. If you're not in a building, not on a common path, then why not? On the middle of the lawn? I don't care. But apparently my school does.

Also, there's a shift in our nation about finally beginning to address obesity. Give it time. There was a period of time in the US where smokers were totally acceptable remember...
 

michael87cn

New member
Jan 12, 2011
922
0
0
Brawndo said:
I don't know how it is the UK and Australia, but in the United States, smokers have developed a pariah-like status over the years. There are all kinds of anti-smoking campaigns, city ordinances not allowing smoking within X number of feet from a building, etc. But at the same time in the US, it is politically incorrect to criticize those who are overweight and obese. Some might argue: "Second hand smoke harms other people, but it's my choice to eat what I want and this doesn't harm other people."

However, it DOES harm other people, just not in the same way as second-hand smoke. According to a recent study, annual spending on obesity-related diseases is expected to rise by 13-16% in the US by 2030, leading to 2.6% increase in national health spending. Total medical costs associated with treatment of preventable diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, stroke, and coronary heart disease are estimated to increase by $48-66 billion a year.

That means as a fit person, my taxes will be higher and my insurance premiums will go up to fund increased health care costs associated with an increase in obesity. Also, children with fat parents are less likely to have access to healthy foods and are more likely to be overweight themselves. Other people ARE harmed by you being overweight.

But instead of a nationwide effort to promote healthy eating, there is a culture in the United States of being fat and proud of it. Facebook groups promoting concepts like "big women are beautiful" have millions of followers, and criticism of fat people is called "hate speech". Clearly some overweight people don't want to feel guilty about their behavior choices, so they try to make others feel guilty or embarrassed for criticizing them.

Let make this perfectly clear: being fat should not be a protected class like race, gender, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. Unlike those categories, being fat is almost always a choice. Only a small percentage of people are overweight because of a legitimate medical condition like hyperthyroidism. And sure, eating disorders with psychological roots exist, but let's be honest: most fat people are fat because of poor food choices and because they lack the willpower and motivation to exercise regularly. They just don't like to be called out on it.
Harm is equal to cost? The loss of money is not harm, it's unprofitable.

Once again, bodily harm is not equal to loss of profits.

Also, ignorance causes people to believe that eating is the main cause of obesity when it's really a lack of exercise. If everyone exercised for an hour every day, there would be a lot less fat people (burgers or not).

Furthermore, fat isn't yet scientifically proven to cause bad health besides the disorder diabetes, which isn't necessarily related to fat, but eating too much sugar.

Lots of very heavy people have healthy blood pressure. I would know, I'm a medical transcriptionist. I type up medical documents with patient records of height weight pulse and blood pressure all the time.

Being slim is a luxury and a gift that not everyone can afford. Exercise machines/privacy cost money. Eating expensive health food/feeding a family with it is very expensive.

There's a reason a lot of poor people are heavy and it's not because of over-eating. They can't afford it. It's a lack of exercise.

Your entire post can be summed up to this: I'm a smoker and I want everyone to be one too. I need a justification so I blame fat people.

Let me make this perfectly clear; eating is necessary to stay alive. Putting a rolled up piece of paper with some herbs in it, lighting it on fire and inhaling the smoke is not.

You're spoiled and should have your luxuries taken away from you to give you some perspective on just how good you have it, before you go on some silly crusade against fat people...
 

FernandoV

New member
Dec 12, 2010
575
0
0
GamerKT said:
It usually takes longer for someone to stop being fat than to stop smoking. Also, smoke stinks. The most a fat person could inconvenience another is by taking up extra space or food.
Fat people smell and are unsightly.
 

mau5trap

New member
Nov 20, 2011
25
0
0
AlAaraaf74 said:
I only criticize people who complain.

"Why can't I smoke wherever I want?"
-Because you smell horrid.
"I wish I was skinny..."
-Then stop eating and exercize.
/thread

Same as me they complain about being fat/a smoker but they do nothing to prevent it
 

RatRace123

Elite Member
Dec 1, 2009
6,651
0
41
Well, maybe people don't feel the need to criticize fat people since the media seems to do it well enough on their own.
And billboards
And magazines
And talk shows
And commercials
And self help programs
And the public educational system
And dating sites...
Really the list goes on.

But to the point, as others have said. Second hand smoke has been shown to cause damage to non smokers while second hand fat does not have the same effect. I guess since the only person a fat person is hurting is themselves, we don't tend to look at it the same way.
 

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
The difference is very simple.

A fat person doesn't force bacon down my throat in order for them to eat. A smoker does force others to breath in his drug.

One is immediately self-contained, and the other inconveniences those around you.
 

HalfTangible

New member
Apr 13, 2011
417
0
0
Here's my guess: Because when you criticize a smoker (i'm assuming you don't already know him, in which case you would only know he's a smoker because he's smoking), there is something he can do right that moment: put out his cigarette and stop. At least until you leave.

On the other hand, Unless a fat person is actively chowing down on six cheeseburgers and three orders of fries, telling them to shape up is almost always pointless, as you can't really tell if they are currently trying to better themselves, and there's nothing they can do about it right that moment even if they aren't. In addition, diseases like Hypoglycemia essentially FORCE you to fatten up by dictating your dietary habits and they're not immediately visible.
 

DarkRyter

New member
Dec 15, 2008
3,078
0
0
I don't know about you, but I criticize fat people all the time.

Probably out of some primal fear that if they wished to, they could eat me.
 

Delsana

New member
Aug 16, 2011
866
0
0
In society if it effects others than it is not just your right.

So that's why people target smoking, though it's also a very nasty habit (though I'm partial to cigars as you don't inhale them and over-indulging is less likely and it's not really an addiction to be honest) and causes cancer.

Obesity ... well it just makes you look ugly. It's more a problem for the user than it is for others.
 

michael87cn

New member
Jan 12, 2011
922
0
0
This will be my one post that isn't a reply to someone else in this thread.

My outlook on people is: I don't care what they are or what they do. I do not judge people or criticize.

Why? No one is perfect. Everyone has faults. Everyone has addictions, obsessions, some kind of problem they deal with that keeps them from being perfect.

Be it lust, envy, anger, depression, substance abuse, over-eating, over-anything, the list can go on.

It's easy to be one of the bullies or the jerks that points at someone else and says "you have a problem". It takes a bigger person to look at themselves instead and realize their own faults, and then give others some slack.
 

walrusaurus

New member
Mar 1, 2011
595
0
0
And lets also be clear about the finances of being fat versus smoking. For the working poor the kind of diet and exercise required for maintaining a healthy body weight can be extremely difficult to impossible. From the prospective of someone who until very recently was working 70+ hours a week just to pay my rent and debt, with only $50-60 left for food every month, the last thing i wanted to do when i got home was spend an hour jogging/working-out; if that makes me lazy, or a fat-ass, then so be it. When you've got $2/day food budget your more concerned with how many total calories you can get, than where they're coming from. And that was just for myself, i couldn't imagine trying to feed a household.

The reality is: the cheapest, most energy rich foods available to Americans are also the most nutrient poor.
 

McNinja

New member
Sep 21, 2008
1,510
0
0
MelasZepheos said:
There is a difference between someone who is healthy and overweight and someone who puts away four bags of doritos a day and has terrible blood pressure and has already suffered a heart attack. You are not costing the taxpayers anymore money by being overweight. The other, obese guy, is. I get your point, but you aren't really the target of the OPs "moralist" views.

There is a difference between being overweight and overfat. See this http://www.strengthforcaring.com/manual/food-fitness-and-wellness-healthy-lifestyle/the-o-words-overweight-and-overfatbasics-of-weight-management/
 

JoesshittyOs

New member
Aug 10, 2011
1,965
0
0
Food's necessary for survival. Some people just like to indulge a bit more.

There's really no reason to start smoking in the first place except for peer pressure/thinking it makes you look cool.

That's the way I look at it, and I'll even occasionally indulge in a cigar every once in a while.