Obesity's price tag

[MaggieMae]

Capitalism also leads to light as air running shoes (including my size 13's) Pilaties classes available in every city, Yoga, Strollers built for joggers, exercise bikes, home weight training systems, a diet book industry, exercise balls, electronic cardio monitors, treadmills, Bowflex, rock climbing, aqua aerobics, home gyms, stairclimbers, rowing machines, elliptical trainers, nautilus, walking/running/biking/hiking paths/trails, roller blades, ice skating rinks, bowling alleys, golf courses, putt putt golf, swimming pools, skiing resorts, surfboarding, beach vollyball, home weightlifting equitment, basketball/tennis courts etc etc etc

There are private places for all of the above.

There are public places for all of the above, paid for though the wealth generated by our partly capitalistic system.

On edit:

Capitalism is not a health problem. lol

^^ Classic. Nowhere can that be proven more untrue than a stroll around WalMart on any given day:

Memo to Tank: Perhaps a "study" should be done in a WalMart store to get a more accurate picture of ethnicity and obesity.

http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?page_id=9798&paged=2

And found in the whitest state:
http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?s=Utah

Really?

Capitalism provides a wide variety of goods and services, both high end and low end, that people can choose to partake of and the proof AGAINST that truth is Wal Mart?

Yikes.

You didn't look at the pictures? No wonder you're confused. The hilarious site is full of photographs of obese people, white/black/whatever, all "partaking" of the goodies for sale at WalMart. I meant it as a parody on capitalism. Lighten up.

 

[MaggieMae]

This steady drumbeat of reporting on foods and obesity reminds me of the early rumblings of the tobacco fascists.

Can class action suits against Jack in the Box and McD's (Big Food) be far off?

San Jose CA is already trying to outlaw Happy Meals.

 

[DiveCon]

^^ Classic. Nowhere can that be proven more untrue than a stroll around WalMart on any given day:

Memo to Tank: Perhaps a "study" should be done in a WalMart store to get a more accurate picture of ethnicity and obesity.

Funny Pictures at WalMart Photos

And found in the whitest state:
Funny Pictures at WalMart Utah Search Results

Really?

Capitalism provides a wide variety of goods and services, both high end and low end, that people can choose to partake of and the proof AGAINST that truth is Wal Mart?

Yikes.

You didn't look at the pictures? No wonder you're confused. The hilarious site is full of photographs of obese people, white/black/whatever, all "partaking" of the goodies for sale at WalMart. I meant it as a parody on capitalism. Lighten up.

the bottom one the woman wasn't so much obese as she was "exposing her assets"

 

[Againsheila]

Where else on the planet are historically poor demographics (as defined by government standards) obese?

Can we say that the government model of eradicating poverty has failed, and can we say that no person who is obese is poor?

Uh, no. The truth is that the fatty foods and starches are the main staples of diets for the poor, hence they have more weight problems. Now if you want to start paying for them to have lean meats and fresh vegetables, things may change.

 

[boedicca]

What IS your point in posting this?

The ObamaCare you support forces all of us to pay for the extraordinary care for the obese. Are they now going to be a target for rationed/denied care under the Berwick model?

That must be why we are all going to be forced to provide our BMI electronically to the government.

"Forced to provide our BMI"?

LMAO. It's not like it's your tax return and most clinics and hospitals routinely include it in vitals now.

And yes, preventing obesity is why they do it. It's responsible health maintenance.

So, just because we have been forced to give up some privacy, we now should give up any expectation of privacy whatsover so the Feds can create a giant database?

Any info I share with my doctor is voluntary. The very odd thing about this mandatory ObamaCare data is that it will exclude HIV status and abortion history. Why is a person's BMI considered critical, but whether said person is HIV positive is not?

The average AIDs patient consumes health care at a much higher ratio than the average person, which is the pretext for requiring BMI so the Feds can target the Fat Fatties.

But we know it's not really for health, it's for politically correct social engineering.

 

[MaggieMae]

Where else on the planet are historically poor demographics (as defined by government standards) obese?

Can we say that the government model of eradicating poverty has failed, and can we say that no person who is obese is poor?

Uh, no. The truth is that the fatty foods and starches are the main staples of diets for the poor, hence they have more weight problems. Now if you want to start paying for them to have lean meats and fresh vegetables, things may change.

There are also hereditary factors involved. For Latinos, women tend to have chunky, muscular frames; not so much the men who tend to be leaner.

 

[MaggieMae]

What IS your point in posting this?

The ObamaCare you support forces all of us to pay for the extraordinary care for the obese. Are they now going to be a target for rationed/denied care under the Berwick model?

That must be why we are all going to be forced to provide our BMI electronically to the government.

"Forced to provide our BMI"?

LMAO. It's not like it's your tax return and most clinics and hospitals routinely include it in vitals now.

And yes, preventing obesity is why they do it. It's responsible health maintenance.

So, just because we have been forced to give up some privacy, we now should give up any expectation of privacy whatsover so the Feds can create a giant database?

Any info I share with my doctor is voluntary. The very odd thing about this mandatory ObamaCare data is that it will exclude HIV status and abortion history. Why is a person's BMI considered critical, but whether said person is HIV positive is not?

The average AIDs patient consumes health care at a much higher ratio than the average person, which is the pretext for requiring BMI so the Feds can target the Fat Fatties.

But we know it's not really for health, it's for politically correct social engineering.

What database? No new database is planned to collect info on your weight which is routinely noted in your chart anyway. The BMI is part of a physical exam; has been for decades, because health officials are fully aware of the problem of obesity (easily cured in most cases).

As for HIV and abortion history, that information will remain private and not become a part of any database, for which you should be happy, not critical. You make no sense. But then you never do.

 

[chanel]

EHR's Maggie. Medical history should include all risk factors - not just BMI.

 

[boedicca]

If Maggie thinks I don't make sense, that is affirmation that I am indeed making a great deal of logical sense.

Not including HIV status is inane, considering how our government has promoted it as one of the biggest health threats ever.

 

[MaggieMae]

EHR's Maggie. Medical history should include all risk factors - not just BMI.

Strictly regarding a database, which could be accessed by any licensed physician, all that would be needed is a flag of some sort for private consultation if one doctor is reviewing the medical history posted by another. There is no need to post within the database THIS PERSON HAS AIDS.

 

[boedicca]

Then why should the database include BMI?

If somebody is obese, the doctor can see that fact by visual observation. The only reason for the government to collect this data is for social engineering and rationing purposes. It serves not purpose for the individual treatment of the patient.

Obesity is not contagious, btw. AIDs is. HIV status is far more relevant as a public health concern.

 

[chanel]

I don't know what kind of red flag you are suggesting, but knowing that a patient has AIDS or cancer or drug addiction or whatever should be as important if not more so than a person's weight. Drug contraindications?

 

[MaggieMae]

If Maggie thinks I don't make sense, that is affirmation that I am indeed making a great deal of logical sense.

Not including HIV status is inane, considering how our government has promoted it as one of the biggest health threats ever.

You're never logical, sweetie.

Quote: Originally Posted by MaggieMae
At least they [gays] have a better chance at attaining full equality with Dems at the helm.

Ignorant Boediccca's offering:
Only if your definition of full equality is equal misery, squalor, and low living standards for everyone, except of course the government overlords.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/126787-sherrods-going-to-sue-breitbart-29.html

 

[MaggieMae]

I don't know what kind of red flag you are suggesting, but knowing that a patient has AIDS or cancer or drug addiction or whatever should be as important if not more so than a person's weight. Drug contraindications?

As far as I can determine, the patient privacy act, enacted in 1996, has not been eliminated by the new health care reform bill.

http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs8a-hipaa.htm#5

 

[boedicca]

As usual, Maggie has nothing relevant to add to the discussion.

Run along dearie. I'm sure one of your 17 cat boxes must need cleaning.

 

[geauxtohell]

So, just because we have been forced to give up some privacy, we now should give up any expectation of privacy whatsover so the Feds can create a giant database?

LMAO. What privacy? BMI is just a ratio of your weight and height. It's not like this is top secret information. Do you even know what you are talking about?

Any info I share with my doctor is voluntary.

Again, if you get weighed and give your height, you have a patients BMI. It's a routine part of the intake that is now included in vitals. If I were a physician, I wouldn't treat anybody that refused to step on a scale as they are not complying with my attempts to treat them medically.

The very odd thing about this mandatory ObamaCare data is that it will exclude HIV status and abortion history. Why is a person's BMI considered critical, but whether said person is HIV positive is not?

Abortion history is completely irrelevant to primary care. It is certainly relevant to obstetrics. I have my doubts that HIV status is going to be confidential. I'd like to see a link.

The average AIDs patient consumes health care at a much higher ratio than the average person, which is the pretext for requiring BMI so the Feds can target the Fat Fatties.

Sure. On a 1:1 ratio. However, the number of Obese people in this country dwarves people with HIV and the resultant plethora of health complications secondary to obesity dwarf costs of HIV treatment.

But we know it's not really for health, it's for politically correct social engineering.

If you think BMI has nothing to do with health, you are an idiot. Sorry, but it's the truth

 

[boedicca]

I didn't say that BMI has nothing to do with health - the government collecting this info in a centralized database does nothing for a patient's health. The doctor can observe this information for himself.

And here's an Obamanoid on what data patients may refuse to provide:

Dr. David Blumenthal, the Obama administration's National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, said on Tuesday that patients can choose to omit procedures such as abortions and positive HIV tests from the electronic health records (EHR) that every American is supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the economic stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year.

CNSNews.com - Obama's Electronic Health Records Czar: HIV Status and Abortions Need Not be Included


Yet BMI is specifically mentioned in the HIT Standards:

(e) Record and chart vital signs.

(1) Vital signs. Enable a user to electronically record, modify, and retrieve a patient’s vital signs including, at a minimum, the height, weight, blood pressure, temperature, and pulse.

(2) Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient’s height and weight.

(3) Plot and display growth charts. Plot and electronically display, upon request, growth charts for patients 2-20 years old.


HIT Standards 170.302



Infectious, incurable diseases need not be recorded, but BMI is required.

It's nuts.

 

[MaggieMae]

As usual, Maggie has nothing relevant to add to the discussion.

Run along dearie. I'm sure one of your 17 cat boxes must need cleaning.

That's odd because I rarely see anyone rushing to defend or agree with a single thing you post simply because they're replete with childish remarks such as the above. God you're dumb.

 

[geauxtohell]

I didn't say that BMI has nothing to do with health - the government collecting this info in a centralized database does nothing for a patient's health. The doctor can observe this information for himself.

No he can't. BMI measures if people are underweight, appropriate weight, overweight, obese, or morbidly obese. You can't really eyeball that. You can tell when someone is morbidly obese by looking. The goal is to catch them as when they are "overweight" and keep them from becoming "obese". It's appropriate health maintenance.

Furthermore, we now know that when a person becomes obese, they can never lose the adipose cells in the centripetal and gluteal region. The best they can do is burn them down little empty boxes. However, the boxes are there ready to restore fat when the person stops working out. This is one reason that it is so hard for obese people to keep weight off. So there is actual medicine behind this that is justified regardless of your paranoid rants.

Obesity and the constellation of health problems that follow it are quickly eclipsing other pathologies in frequency and severity as time progresses.

And here's an Obamanoid on what data patients may refuse to provide:

Dr. David Blumenthal, the Obama administration's National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, said on Tuesday that patients can choose to omit procedures such as abortions and positive HIV tests from the electronic health records (EHR) that every American is supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the economic stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year.

CNSNews.com - Obama's Electronic Health Records Czar: HIV Status and Abortions Need Not be Included


Yet BMI is specifically mentioned in the HIT Standards:

(e) Record and chart vital signs.

(1) Vital signs. Enable a user to electronically record, modify, and retrieve a patient’s vital signs including, at a minimum, the height, weight, blood pressure, temperature, and pulse.

(2) Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient’s height and weight.

(3) Plot and display growth charts. Plot and electronically display, upon request, growth charts for patients 2-20 years old.


HIT Standards 170.302

1.) Gee, didn't I tell you that virtually every doctor today includes BMI in vital signs?

2.) Unless a woman is being treated for pregnancy, the number of abortions they have had is completely irrelevant. If she is pregnant, it is relevant but less so than c-sections. There is absolutely no reason why a primary care provider needs to know if a woman has had an abortion.

HIV is different. A Doctor needs to know that, especially considering the HAART drugs and how they interact with other medications. Of course, a physician is going to be able to figure it out by looking at someone's medications but that is less desirable than it being in the record.

I am suspect that such bad medicine would be policy. I suspect it's like our system where electronic record information is tiered based on "need to know" so a medical student who is seeing someone in clinic for a routine exam wouldn't have access to the fact that they have HIV but the physician would.

I don't agree with that either, but it's the way it works.

Infectious, incurable diseases need not be recorded, but BMI is required.

It's nuts.

That's because BMI is a vital that is not a self-reporting issue. This makes as much sense as bitching about blood pressure being included in medical records.

Really, this basically looks like you just want something to bitch about.

 

[geauxtohell]

As usual, Maggie has nothing relevant to add to the discussion.

Run along dearie. I'm sure one of your 17 cat boxes must need cleaning.

That's odd because I rarely see anyone rushing to defend or agree with a single thing you post simply because they're replete with childish remarks such as the above. God you're dumb.

She's on an island trying to say that BMI should be classified or is not important to good health.

Good luck finding a health care professional that agrees with that.