This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Obama Begins "Lifestyle Health Modification" Program, Mandating Behavioural Changes Within US Society
Last week, with little fanfare, among the ever deteriorating oil spill crisis, the White House quietly noted the issuance of an executive order "Establishing the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council", in which the president, citing the “authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America” is now actively engaging in "lifestyle behavior modification" for American citizens that do not exhibit "healthy behavior." At least initially, the 8 main verticals of focus will include: smoking cessation; proper nutrition; appropriate exercise; mental health; behavioral health; sedentary behavior; substance-use disorder; and domestic violence screenings. Eventually we fully anticipate that the program will also target such wholesome activities as screening for precious metal holdings, monthly minimum usage of available revolving credit (and a minimum threshold thereto) and the susceptibility of an individual to stay current on one's mortgage. Additionally, the president will establish yet another Advisory Group, composed of "experts" picked from the public health field, and one which tracks the successful uptake by the US population of the precepts for a better functioning society that the president deems important. Cosmo culture has just been adopted by the White House, where Big Brother is now in the business of counting calories, and soon, your bars of gold.
From the Executive Order, defining the duties of the Council:
Sec. 3. Purposes and Duties. The Council shall:
(a) provide coordination and leadership at the Federal level, and among all executive departments and agencies, with respect to prevention, wellness, and health promotion practices, the public health system, and integrative health care in the United States;
(b) develop, after obtaining input from relevant stakeholders, a national prevention, health promotion, public health, and integrative health-care strategy that incorporates the most effective and achievable means of improving the health status of Americans and reducing the incidence of preventable illness and disability in the United States, as further described in section 5 of this order;
(c) provide recommendations to the President and the Congress concerning the most pressing health issues confronting the United States and changes in Federal policy to achieve national wellness, health promotion, and public health goals, including the reduction of tobacco use, sedentary behavior, and poor nutrition;
(d) consider and propose evidence-based models, policies, and innovative approaches for the promotion of transformative models of prevention, integrative health, and public health on individual and community levels across the United States;
(e) establish processes for continual public input, including input from State, regional, and local leadership communities and other relevant stakeholders, including Indian tribes and tribal organizations;
(f) submit the reports required by section 6 of this order; and
(g) carry out such other activities as are determined appropriate by the President.
For some reason item (g) seems supiciously similar to the Goldman Sachs ethics waiver.
For a slightly less politically correct and slightly truthier interpretation of this latest invasion into individual privacy, Nanny State has the following opinion:
Whether you are a child, a parent, a worker, or retired, the President’s approximately 25-member “Advisory Group” will soon be present in every aspect of Americans’ lives, as the Executive Order prescribes. Specifically, our new so-called lifestyle behavior modification advisors will be actively carrying out the President’s orders in:
- worksite health promotion;
- community services, including community health centers;
- preventive medicine;
- health coaching;
- public health education;
- geriatrics; and
- rehabilitation medicine.
President Obama’s sweeping plan to enforce “lifestyle behavior modification” is chock full of open-ended target areas, especially when it comes to issues of “mental” and “behavioral” health, “proper nutrition,” “sedentary behavior,” and “appropriate exercise.” The President’s Executive Order is a blatant and forceful attempt to adjust the way Americans young and old think, behave, eat, drink and whatever else free will used to entitle our nation’s citizens to enjoy as prescribed by the Founding Fathers.
If you are feeling stressed-out, sad, confused, hungry, thirsty, bored, or tired, do you honestly trust President Obama and his “Advisory Group” to act in your best interests?
Way to go Rahm: yet another unprecedented ecological crisis used skillfully by the administration to pass a covert and some would say unconstitutional executive order. On the other hand, we asked some time ago just what is the constitution to a constitutional law professor? Gradually every person in America is starting to understand the very unpleasant answer to that question. Tangentially, we wonder if the president and the head of the House Financial Services Committee have kicked their respective tobacco/KFC habits yet.
h/t John
»
- 40158 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This should scare the poop out of everyone. I have a lot of contact with Public Health people and they are the biggest fascists of all. They have powers the police would love to have. All they have to do is define something as a "public health threat" and they can do anything they want to you. Eeeek!! Total fascism is here!
As a public health professional, I order you to take a Valium and chill out.
lol, exactly!!
"Goddammit, if I have to quit smoking then so does everybody else. Now get me some of that nasty-ass nicotine gum and type me up an executive order. Somabitches." Barry
Just some sample studies here showing that SMOKERS ARE LESS LIKELY to develop the following medical conditions: Allergies and Asthma At least the Russians will actually do a large study! Nonsmokers are twice as likely to suffer from atopic disorders, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11422156 And, once you're already a sufferer, smoking can then help with inflammation, http://ajplung.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/295/3/L412 Gum Disease This study goes beyond any others I could find because it included an exhaustive list of controls to actually narrow the gap until there was no difference between smokers and nonsmokers. Before the controls, smokers are correlated with healthy gums. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120825769/abstract Breast Cancer Women with the genetic marker for breast cancer are TWICE as likely to develop breast cancer if they smoke, http://www.forces.org/evidence/files/brea.htm Uterine Cancer http://www.nytimes.com/1985/09/05/us/heavy-smoking-found-to-curb-cancer-of-the-uterus-lining.html?sec=health http://uk.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUKCOL56218920080716 http://www.yourdiseaserisk.wustl.edu/hccpquiz.pl?lang=english&func=show&quiz=uterine&page=risk_list Endometrial Cancer http://www.aafp.org/afp/990600ap/3069.html Ulcerative Colitis Also called "Non-Smokers' Disease" More serious than Irritable Bowel Syndrome and more prevalent than Crohn's Disease http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/13/6134.asp Cardiovascular Disease Smokers recover better than nonsmokers after being treated for blocked or narrowed arteries http://85.18.251.150/34/circulation_2001_104_773.htm Carbon monoxide, produced by smoking or by the body when under stress, may also save stroke and heart attack victims http://www.data-yard.net/10b/cm.htmHypertension Helps women avoid high blood pressure during pregnancy. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12699348_The_puzzling_association_between_smoking_and_hypertension_during_pregnancy http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S030121150300006X Tuberculosis Nicotine kills TB even after the TB has become resistant to other drugs, though this study used isolated nicotine. http://www.data-yard.net/10c/nicotine.htm
Parkinson's Disease This one is already fairly well known. http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSCOL06339920070320 http://www.data-yard.net/10v2/parkinson.htm http://www.forces.org/evidence/carol/carol36.htm Alzheimer's Disease This is commonly known, as well. http://www.forces.org/evidence/carol/carol16.htm
Remember the Japanese Smoker's Paradox? Lung cancer rates are the same for smokers and nonsmokers in Japan. Additionally, the population in general smokes more than in the US, yet they still tend to live longer. Health insurers have invested about 4.5 billion dollars in tobacco stock. http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=health-insurers-want-you-to-keep-sm-2009-06-03
They've been playing both sides. No surprise there.I'm not sure what I find more fascinating: your stance, or the amount of sources you've dug up to help validate your stance. Amazing.
"...home of the free"
What's my stance?
You're so quick to assume.
Great point. My word choice was poor.
I was blinded by the sheer audacity of the person who would actually represent health benefits of smoking. Now please, delete those links from your post before someone actually reads them ;-)
Why hide the data? Can't stand to live in a complicated world of grey?
I'm just providing info so that people can make more informed decisions.
You're obviously not of the scientific mindset and prefer the drama of propaganda.
So, should I infer that you assume the world is full of rational beings capable of making informed decisions? To my mind, that could not be the product of a scientific mindset (though, perhaps one operating on limited information and/or experience).
But sure, leave the information out there. People (ab)use information to formulate broken logic to justify personal gratification on a daily basis. Hell, that's the source of America's health care predicament to begin with.
[Edit] Funny... you're brand of sarcasm and thirst for information comes across as eerily familiar.
Nobody is assuming the world is full of rational folks, but you seem to assume the government has some kind of exemption to this rule. The science behind a lot of the 'you got sick because ...' lectures is really about the health profession not really knowing why you got sick, and being unwilling to acknowledge their ignorance, but being way more comfortable blaming the patient.
The link between diet and cholesterol was disproven in 1960, yet the health powers-that-be still keep nattering on about diet.
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cardiovascular-disease/framingham-fol...
Folks in government use broken logic to restrict liberties every day. The trouble is that there is no escape from such dangerous fools with the power of law behind them. I'm really not ok with a government agency telling me what's good for me, when I know how susceptible our representatives are to the money and blandishments of General Mills, ADM, or JNJ. And judging from current (Guam sinking) and prospective (Green of SC) representatives, the general IQ of our government seems to be going downhill.
personally, i care less that the gov't wants me not to smoke or consume mass quantities or "have poor mental health" than that it claims the power to kill me anywhere in the world at any time by secret executive order without trial or appeal or, alternatively, imprison me without right to trial or counsel, in secret, with "intensive interrogation" (or sub it out to another country) for as long as it wishes. even seizing gold seems to pale in comparison.
"The science behind.... 'you got sick because ...' is really about the health profession not really knowing...., and being unwilling to acknowledge their ignorance."
BINGO! There is a reason they calll it Practicing Medicine.
dang, not the stance, the amount of info available. Great.
kinda why I'm mostly lurking here--all y'all let us learn and evaluate.
- Ned (yep, new meat in this venue).
I have a thing for actually reading sources and scientific publications, as I am my own authority.
Do you by chance also have a thing for theory vs. application? In other words, do (did) you smoke?
I do (did).
[Edit] Huh. INCREDIBLY familiar.
deleted.
Of course you'll get fewer of those afflictions. You will die on average about 15 years younger so there's less time to get them. Idiot!
Gee, only 15 years. Why, I can't wait to turn 85 so I can get my goobermint diapers (the ones that the tape won't stick) and lie around watching C-SPAN and CNBC (the only choices at that time), hoping and praying to die soon since I am still being assesed oxygen taxes and wondiering why I didn't keep smoking so I could have arrived at the final destination anyway holding on to a little dignity and still knowing the definition of LIBERTY. I really do hate nazis in any form.
"I really do hate nazis in any form."
You mean he's NOT the one we've been waiting for? ;-)
I gave up waiting for anyone long ago. Choose your own destiny and normally it will not involve goobermint in any form or fashion (or fascison).
I can't believe someone is actually making a case for eugenics below...Shakespeare was wrong...we should start with academics...LOL.
Agreed. It is the Smokers and the prople that drink Alcohol, eat fattie foods that will die early. Stroke, Heart Attack, Sirosis of the Liver. Quick Deaths no Long Term Care. That will save the Government on Social Security and Medicare.
It is the Healthy people they should worry about. The ones who's Bodies give out to need diapers, loose their hearing, their sight and get Alzheimers and live into their 90's.
I think Obama's new health plan should include encouraging people to BASE jump, drive motorcycles at high speeds, alcoholism, chain smoking and obesity.
Not one reference to a study that you've actually read?
Too bad because 15 years was such a nice round number.
Thank you. Every time my wife pays, $49.00 for a carton of Marlboro from my checking account, she says I am wasting my money. I tell her if she bought good lottery tickets it does not matter. With the links you have provided I now have more ammunition for my position.
My refusaul to quick smoking combined with a pathological disregard for statistics I have no understanding of risk and reward.
there is no smoking upstairs. smoke while you can.
can you define, SMOKERS?
They probably roll their own; goes back to the quality issue.
Thesapein: never get dragged into a ratinoal discussion of whether smoking is good/bad for you. It's none of their business either way. And you'll never win even if they were rational...because you can never, ever underestimate the work ethic of people determined to tell other people how to live their lives. Read Jonah Goldberg's "Liberal Facism" to get a good look at that philosophy, and I think you'll realize the argument to make to Joe Sixpack is "it doesn't matter if smoking kills you in the first 5 years of having one--Uncle Sam should fuck off and not bother you.
For the moderate voter, that'll work. You'll never convince the left though. It never even occurs to them to let you suffer the consequences of your own decisions, because they're so much smarter than society at large that it'd be selfish of them to leave you alone. Like when Bill Clinton made a mistake and admitted he was uncomfortable with returning tax money to taxpayers during a budget surplus because they "might not spend it on the right things."
OMG!! +1.3x10^13 You are spot on, dude. Oddly enough, my very best friend in the world for the past 35 years is a total democrat and Obama supporter. I love her dearly for so many things despite her political views, but this is exactly how she thinks. She is a very successful psychologist, a phenomenal mother, the list goes on and on. But she truly believes it is her duty to tell other people how they should live. I'm sure she sees the worst of the worst of human nature in her job and those experiences have led her to her position that society must be controlled because most of 'em do a shitty ass job on their own. My opinion is similar, but my solution the exact opposite. Let people fail, let people accept consequences for their actions. In the long run I think we are stronger overall as a society if we learn how to take care of ourselves and one another at an individual level, rather than be told how to live by some far removed man-who-thinks-he-is-God.
You overlooked a possibility. If we let the science slide too far, as we have, then the crazies start thinking really crazy stuff like that smokers are polluters and need to be stopped from harming not only themselves but others. This gives them a moral reason to act that voids your liberal defense.
I am impressed by the depth of your research but not surprised. I knew a famous shaman in the south who insisted that Tobacco was sacred, and only those who used it for purposes other than advancing their consciousness would be adversely affected. Further, smoking pure tabacco versus cigs. also has far fewer negative health impacts. I do not smoke so I really do not feel an attachment to any particular view.
It's hard to study the health benefits of something in a country where most people over-consume until they're dead. Too much of a good thing often kills.
Kinda hard to get all those diseases you mention when you already died of lung cancer.
That said, it's none of the governments business whether you smoke or not, just don't blow smoke up our collective asses trying to argue that smoking is good for you.
Imagine that.......just when First Dude is making a daily move into 2 packs of Marlboro Reds and a box of Nicorette, he goes and pulls this "get healthy" schtick.
Michele must be putting a foot up his arse every day to take the nicotine pledge. Now she's made him sign this order as the final solution. Not that it will matter.
He's lost control.
Rainy.....You just don't get IT....IT is all ABOUT control......
if he was really about 'change you can believe in', he would strike a compromise with Michelle and agree only to smoke homegrown from the WH organic garden.
Ah that explains why they needed to jam the Health Bill thown our throats.
Off topic, check out what I found on the topic of Goldman's ethics........from WallStOnion.blogspot.com
Goldman Invents the "Separete Investment Yatch"
Instead of using the traditional and outdated, Separate Investment Vehicle (SIV), to carry out their mission's, Goldman Sachs has invented the "Separate Investment Yacht" or better known as the (SIY).
The purpose of the yacht, is to transport and position the investments directly over the port of the country with the lowest tax rates. The yacht allows for the transport of investments over bodies of water, something it's predecessor, the vehicle was unable to do, while keeping the certificates dry and safe keeping.
Former CEO Hank Paulson explains, in the old days we use to fill a vehicle with money and just park it in the garage until the garage was full, at which point we shipped all the vehicles to the Cayman Islands for unloading, and then returned the vehicles back to the garage at the Goldman Sachs.
Our initial problem began in 2008, after we made a boat load of money crashing sub prime, the oil market, stock market etc, and all of a sudden we had this massive amount of profits that we needed to conceal. So the idea of a yacht was introduced, mainly because we were shipping so many vehicles to the Caymans, that our clients started asking us if we were in the car business?
Additional we were running out space to park these vehicles in the Caymans, so we thought with a yacht, we could just dock at the port of the country with the lowest tax rates, and never even unload these investments. And if another country lowered the tax rate even more, well hell, we would just go dock over there!
Hank Paulson also mentioned that idea came to him while he was gambling on a river boat, docked on the river, next to Gary Indiana while working at Goldman in Chicago. While it was illegal to gamble on land, it was legal to gamble on the boat, even though the boat didn't go anywhere. It was forever docked on the river, a clever loophole, that Hank Paulson put in his back pocket to be used 20 years later!
Please order your prez to b*tch slap his woman, her a** is the size of a smart car.
: )
Wrong, I am 50 and can run circles around people half my age. I do hope you are joking.
What is your BMI? Or will your husband be using the marathon as a test. Too bad if you are handicapped huh?
Tom Cruise is 200 lbs thus considered "obese" by Mrs "Baby's got back"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY84MRnxVzo
I don't know cuz I don't obsess about my health, I just practice good health, the way I want. Who the fuck are you anyway, some overweight, drug addicted, transvestite tapping out utter nonsense from your syphilis infested brain?
such potty mouth from the 1st lady!
OOPS! My apologies, misunderstood, thought she was zooming me. Duh. My bad. Now, as fun as this thread is, I must get back to my garden, siesta is over.
I hate running in circles, you never get anywhere.
"Junk in the Trunk" is bootylicious
Signed,
Soetero
once knew a guy visiting tehran who commented on the nice figure of the then shaw's wife . ended up costing a lot to get him out of prison. be careful, land of the free no more.
Hey, i saved all of us from the bubonic plague by catching the rats under my house, do i get a reward and do i have to share whats left? We were hungry
I too have a number of close friends and acquaintances at exceedingly senior positions in the public sector's health care profession. They are indeed a scary bunch of Fascists, longing dearly to to attain the Power Descendant for Upon High to Mandate virtually every single facet of our lives which may in even the slightest, remote incidental element, be consider pertinent to our health and by extension, lives. And Regulate Such.
The especially worrisome part is that they are not particularly interested in "Taxes", sin taxes, etc., but instead in the Regulatory Methodologies best desdribed as Mandating, Outlawing and Prohibiting that which they feel should not be partaken by the Masses. (Whilst many display alcohol and sundry additional addictions.)
Also note, the absence of any reference to alcohol as a health "problem" when it is one of the most deadly toxins that individuals choose to legally ingest. Not that I wish or suggest in any way to control your behavior. Should you wish to ingest industrial solvents, that's your choice....prohibitions are notoriously ineffective, indeed spawn significant unintended consequences. (BTW, I am biased, having worked in the Recovery field.)
Interesting introduction to the Oppression State of Big Brother.
Orwell was Prescient.
doesn't matter what you do in the states its illegal.
It's definitely Kali Yuga here in USA.
Where's Monty Python when you need them? Why isnt someone taking the complete and utter piss out of this? Ministry of Silly Walks up next. LOL!
The IRS and the Dept of Education (!) have put in their RFQs for 14" barrel shotguns, can the Health Troopers be far behind?
The IRS and the Dept of Education (!) have put in their RFQs for 14" barrel shotguns...
What's the stk symb..??l
DAMN, they got me on every count!
I will be in classes full time with my issues.
And no time to read ZH.
I sure hope I dont have to pay for it?
Maybe thats what all the fuss was over the health bill: forcing people to get insurance to now cover all this BS help they need with their health issues. Sounds like a great racket.
BUT BUT...this is a jobs program. Isn't "health care" the fastest growing jobs market after MSM talking heads slots?
I may be sick, but I am not ill.
Don't know about you, but I am not cussing anymore, and I mean it this time. Really, I F#@K*&^ mean it, really.
After crapped your pants,
get a good laugh at
www.WallStOnion.blogspot.com
Obama smokes and drinks, how could he do this to us.
Well I guess its time to go to that Yoga class I have been avoiding.
The Big Pharma Swine Flu scare didn't really pan out for them last fall. Took a cash flow hit on that scam
Sad. I guess they will re-package that vaccine as a bee sting vaccine or alternative to Viagra or something?
Why isnt this on Fox news? Is this a Guest post or just another editorial? Where are the charts to prove it?
Don't ask questions. Just get down and give me 50!
hahaha!
That's curious, because the Constitution vests ZERO power in the pretentious cipher in chief to bother anyone about their health.
This speaks volumes about the value of instruction about the Constitution at Harvard University.
They're not bankrupting shit. Taxpayer subsidised medical care for their degenerate asses however...
Um- they are. Their unhealthy lifestyle is a burden to everyone.
Aside from lack of aesthetic pleasantry and a propensity to emit stench, fat people and nicotine addicts are of no burden to me...until my tax money goes to pay for their medical care, disability or unemployment. Cut the handouts and let everything straighten itself out.
Yeah they are. Their health care is prohibitively expensive. Nice stealth reaction, I'd guess you don't go much over 230 at 5'5.
Apparently you have no response to his very valid point. Who cares what fat people do as long as they pay for their own health care?
The solution is to quit paying for care for fatties. But that you would put you food police out of jobs wouldn't it? Can't have that.
A fine solution if this were Libertopia where everyone was responsible for themselves, but it isn't, is it?
Libertopia is here. It means every unemployed loser gets free unlimited health care. Free for them, not for the taxpayer. And smug asses like you get fat checks for being food nazis from the same porkbarrel. Libertopia is what keeps you in clover, jerkoff. I say we should pry you and the other leeches off the public tit and let you work for a living. Fuck you and the arugala pony you rode in on.
Do these "other leeches" include Israel? If so then definitely count me in.
I am Chumbawamba.
No, that's just your schizophrenia talking.
Haha. Whatever, Ignorant Mough Puy.
8 Billion Dollar for israel every year for a country of 7 million, is not a schizophrenia talking. Why should we pay this money, please explain.
Because if you don't, Transformers 3 won't get released this summer.
Asswipe.
Hiel Chumbawamba!
tomater, or not, its HEIL, like in SIEG HEIL. When using so few words to make a point, the words need be correct
Dammit. You're right. I hate when that happens. Thanks, though. I don't mind being corrected on stuff like that.
The next time ZH posts a story about lead-based paint in Chinese toys, Chumb will figure a way to blame Israel.
That said, I'm against foreign aid for any...er...bunch of foreigners.
Sorry to appear all schizophrenic, but I do agree with you, however, I hope this executive order was based on the fact that the food industry is too powerful to fight in congress so the president said 'fuck it' and is trying to go it alone, knowing that there is no way to win the fight in congress. I hope in the future the economy and government 'work' so that individual responsibility is rewarded, until that happens we are stuck with what we have. I hope it is sooner than later.
You're already a doomed moron if you actually have faith in your government's ability to run healthcare. Idiots telling idiots what to do, yeah, that's the solution. Let the mob rule you, whatever.
No one, and I do mean no one, has authority over me, myself, and I, and we do amongst ourselves.
Who's schizo, now?
Not even 'you' have authority over what 'you' do... Call me out when you come to terms with that.
X can't have authority over X because it would be circular and nonsensical.
I'm all but positive, but please, humor me... One more comment on this thread for yes, two for no.
I'm sorry you couldn't smoke without smoking too much. I don't have the same personal problem. Or, maybe it's a social problem since so many around you probably over-consumer food, alcohol, shoes, whatever...
I am simply asserting that freewill is an illusion.
and?
so?
it's only because we are always trying to posit an origin when speaking of causality.
no origin, no problem of free will.
No origin, no agent, no free will. So what was your point again?
Pan, I really expected more from you... social engineering/conditioning is a slippery slope and it is a smack in the face to everything this country used to stand for.
Like it or not, social conditioning (and genetics) control behaviour, that is the extent of it. I wish there were more billboards that simply said 'eat shitty food and don't exercise and your life will suck' but I don't think the food companies would appreciate it.
Oh, come on, that's a bullshit response. You can't expect a government that is otherwise incompetent at everything to suddenly become competent enough to manage a program that deigns to modify the behavior of its citizens.
I have pointed out numerous times in this thread the utter idiocy of this edict, based on the fact that the President focuses on the symptoms of a problem rather than its cause. But then, this is the curse of America. We try to avoid reaping what we sow by trying to sow more bad solutions for the last solutions we sowed in order to fix previously flawed solutions, ad nauseum.
I am Chumbawamba.
1. I agree with you there is no way to fix America (short of rebuilding, and that is temporary).
2. Because of 1, any solution won't work.
3. That being said, I don't think this executive order shows he is any more of a Nazi than any other president.
If this was an efficient government I would trust them with this health agenda, but they aren't. Evidence? Everywhere. This should be the parents responsibility to make sure their kids are eating right and exercising. If people are obese or overweight(not just a few pounds) they should pay more in health insurance, pay for an extra seat on a flight, denied employment where it would hinder their efficiency (there goes a lot of cops) ect.. This should be handled by people and businesses not government. I am suspicious of our government in almost everything they do.
OTH if we didn't have inflation in combination with the devaluating of the dollar (huge budget deficit) maybe more families could get by with just one parent working and thus have more time and energy to focus on the family. JMO
iS THERE ANY WAY TO MAKE THE REPLIES SKINNIER? Sorry for the caps, I was programming machine tools.
Feck your goomint. Leave us alone.
I didn't set the size, but if this kind of detail bothers you maybe you should take a break, and get some rest.
Chumbawamba i usually agree with you. People have been conditioned via advertising and false expectations as presented by media , shools and government. Thats why we have a public that has little to no awareness of gold or silver or what is real value. we have created a society of dependent sheep over time.
Those few of us that have gained some measure of free will and actually think for ourselves are rare indeed. The general state of human beings is very low at this time.
None of my neighbors have a clue until i inform them and then they dont want to believe me.
Most americans i have met have no clue about 1913, 1933 Bankrupt, 71' nixon gold standard or 911 and how buildings really get demolished.
Moreover there is the spiritual loss as most think they are the bodies they are in despite the fact they claim to have a soul. Think about the lack of common sense in that, what is right in front of us and 99% dont see it. If you are gonna be a soul after you die, why not now?
That is all you get with this chump Chumba. Don't waste your time on it.
If you are trying to get a message out, there are plenty of ways to inform and educate that do not involve hijacking basic human liberties. My high school health class spent a whole week on nutrition... I'm sure it is an issue that garners even more attention in the classroom today.
Also, an accounting leddger should never be used as grounds to try and manipulate personal freedom. Who the heck is to say what a "proper" life is? Choice is so much more important.
"Like it or not, social conditioning (and genetics) control behaviour, that is the extent of it."
Oh goody...eugenics is making a comeback.
They've just decided that the various rebranding schemes were too inexpedient.
+1
Dude's a Troll
http://bookreviewsbybobbie.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/do-not-feed-the-t...
Pantheist is asleep at the wheel, lost in the weeds, dishonest, or just plain stupid. Yes. I said Stupid. The Point, Assface, is that it doesn't become MY problem until you and your leather-legged brownshirts come and force me to pay with a gun to my head. You are either unbelieveably obtuse ar evil. I'm not sure which is worse. Please, God, don't let Pantheist have any power.
Dipshit.
By the way, I'm 43, 5'-11", 180 lbs. I don't smoke, and I only drink very, very expensive scotch. So I can't drink very much of it.
Are you not paying your taxes then? Am I the only person that pays his taxes?
Migod.
Are you being serious? Or are you just baiting me (us)? If so, it's working. SUPPORTING FAT FATTIES IS NOT WHAT TAX DOLLARS ARE FOR!
I can't believe I'm falling for this shit.
lol, yes, Pan is a "belligerent".
Nothing wrong with giving complete control over the food to a bunch of sick fuckheads at a few mega corporations making everyone sick as fuck and then blaming it on them. Remember being in charge is nothing more than making people feel responsible while you screw them over.
Only pussies pay taxes.
I do worship your avatar. He has quite the legacy that is puking for you boomers. Got SS, ya creepy frosty tops?
Apparently, look at the deficit man!
Ohhh Whaaaaaaaaaa!!!
Dewars you elitist bitch!
Given that vitually all health care policies are NOT underwritten to take a person's individual lifestyle choices into account (see: Safeway), fat people ARE adversely affecting everyone else's health care costs.
Until health insurance is underwritten in a manner more consistent to life insurance these problems will continue to grow (pun intended).
This is 100 percent true.
Exceptions should be made (i.e. pre-existing conditions, etc.), but self-inflicted lifestyle choices are THE PRIMARY COST DRIVER of health care in America.
Anyone who has spent more than 30 minutes exploring these irrefutable facts could not, in sound mind or body, disagree in any way, shape, or form.
Having said that, it's not the government's place to tell you, me, or anyone else what we CAN or CANNOT eat, drink, smoke, etc. BUT, it doesn't mean we shouldn't be responsible for what it will COST us (both now and in the future).
Currently, personal accountability does not exist, has created a FAT ASS BLACK SWAN, and is on the verge of eating America whole.
Actually, insurance is the primary driver for rising costs. The more people are able to pay, the higher goes the costs. Duh. Prices are bid up by providers on both sides, whilst the customer with a pocket book exist no more.
Actually, according to the CDC, smoking adds (over average) $1400 per year, while obesity adds roughly $1500. Meanwhile, insurance provides a discount.
See, if you pay cash, you pay full price. But insurance companies negotiate discounts (depending on the size of the insurer and the leverage of the provider in any given market). Listen, most regional hospitals lost their ass last year. Doctors are making less per procedure now than they did 5 years ago. Students all but refuse to go into family medicine because there's no money in it (at least, not enough to cover their growing student loan debts). Same for general surgeons vs. orthopods.
Several of my clients are doctors, and one has been on the board of directors for a global top 50 hospital for the past dozen years. I've got a pretty wide perspective on this one.
"Listen, most regional hospitals lost their ass last year. Doctors are making less per procedure now than they did 5 years ago. Students all but refuse to go into family medicine because there's no money in it (at least, not enough to cover their growing student loan debts)."
I must disagree with this. I just negotiated contracts for a married couple, both of whom are family docs, and their combined annual compensation is +700k. This is in a small, rural, midwest community. If compensation at these levels cannot attract "family medicine" docs, then perhaps neurosurgery is a better option for aspiring medical students. One of my best friends a neurosurgeon, makes into the mid-range of 7 figures. But, I guess the location of these jobs is important. If you are willing *gasp* to live in the midwest (Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri), and further willing to stretch to the rural areas of such places: I assure you above-average income opportunities (for MD's) abound.
Infinitely false.
Ok pan.
Do you live on a beach? If you do, there are many who are tired of paying higher insurance to SUBSIDIZE your lifestyle. Or do you live in one of those golfing subdivisions, sucking up disproportionate resources for yourself while spewing nitrogen fertilizers into MY river? Or are you a city rat who thinks nothing of flushing your toilet or throwing away your hot dog wrapper...where does it go? You never thought of it did you? It can't stay in the city there's no room there, your killing the surrounding countryside with your "lifestyle"
How bout it pan...fess up to your destruction of Gaia and robbing your fellow man...you need to pay dearly for this atrocity and you need to pay me, personally, in gold ;-)
Health insurance is NOT healthcare.
One is a scam.
So you're already wrong, wrong, wrong.
Well, unless you have cash, you need one to pay for the other.
So you're clueless, clueless, clueless.
Cash is not healthcare either, silly.
But lots of cash can make you feel better!
Advertising of drugs...How much has been spent on this since its inception?
How many @#$%^&* drugs have been sold to people that did not require them?
It seems like it took pharma and ambulance chasing scumbags combined to fill the advertising void left by the absence of Big Tobacco.
Pardon my French, but (with respect to this topic) you couldn't find your ass with two hands and a funnel.
I'm a young, healthy, active, self-employed professional who pays a rediculous amount of money for personal health insurance because my healthy lifestyle is being used to subsidize the fat, lazy, and generally unhealthy among us.
America doesn't have a health care crisis, it has a HEALTH CRISIS! LOOK AT EVERYONE AROUND YOU. THEY'RE FAT AS GODDAMN COWS. There are SERIOUS health (care) implications for our (collectively poor) lifestyle choices.
Google "Toby Cosgrove" (Cleveland Clinic CEO) and see what he has to say about obesity and tobacco use, then come back and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about...
So stop paying all that money for health insurance. Get a catastrophic plan, use a retail clinic for the small stuff, and bank the savings. Poor financial planning is not a refutation of the ideals of individual liberty and responsibility.
I agree that our insurance model is as big a problem as subsidies. Employer mandated should be thrown out the window. Make the true costs apparent, and quite likely burdensome, to everyone.
lol, exactly. I am forced to do that now with me and my employees. It's a good way to self regulate risk.
The true costs (and largest cost drivers) are those that are self-inflicted. No amount of personal financial planning can overcome those systemic problems.
I do agree with your thoughts on health insurance planning. But the fact that selecting a catastrophic plan should even be taken into consideration tells you how poorly conceived the current plan is, and why the issues I addressed need to become the focal point of reform.
Yea, I don't think we're too far apart here. Insurance is the enabler for these poor choices. If everyone had to pay their costs out of pocket, except for the catastrophic happenings, behaviors would change in a hurry. Right now it's too easy to afford to be unhealthy because, hey, Uncle Sam or that "idiot boss that holds me down" has to foot the bill. Just imagine how much healthier we'd be as a nation if that were to change. Hell, we might even add some non-Census jobs to the economy if that overbearing burden were lifted.
The presumption here, I believe, is that fat/obese/smoker people are not bothered by being fat/obese/smoker because, wtf, they don't have to pay their true cost of medical coverage (related to being fat/obese/smoker). True?
I disagree? Why? Because this presumes that fat/obese/smoker would chose to not be fat/obese/smoker if they had to pay for their true cost of medical coverage. Right?
If only. They are fat/obese/smoker because they eat too much and exercise too little and no where do I define that as an intelligent choice. Period.
Conclusion? I believe that if fat/obese/smoker had to pay the true cost of medical care - they'd still be fat/obese/smoker. Or at least 90% of them.
Fat/Obese/Smoker? Add "Stupid" - and that ain't gonna change!
At the end of the day, people respond to incentive. Most will change. Some won't. I highlighted a story above (How Safeway Is Cutting Health-Care Costs - WSJ.com) that helped to shed some light on it.
But even if they don't change, me and the other health people among us won't be punished with the adverse consequences of the actions of others (disincentive).
[Edit] It's amazing how people are willing to change something when it starts to cost them a significant amount of money.
I hope that you're right, but my 50 years of living make me skeptical.
Be sure to get back to us and let us know when this particular little fantasy bubble gets popped by something you did not anticipate and pre-arrange for gov't to protect you from it.
Yup. It's amazing how many complex problems could be solved by simple common sense, if given the chance.
I am Chumbawamba.
I am what I eat: Cheap and Easy.
Obamacare has made catastrophic insurance illegal as of its inauguration date. Furhtermore, it has created incentives for employers to quit giving health insurance, because the mandatory fines for not giving it are not pro-rated, and are a pittance for large companies. On top of all that, your new W-2 will sport all the hitherto concealed costs of your insurance--that part paid by your employer--and you will be taxed thereupon. For many, this will mean entering a new tax bracket.
Don't smokers have to pay higher premiums? I'm pretty sure they do for life insurance.
They are a burden to you because they aren't working as efficiently as they could be and they are a national embarrassment, which among other things reduces foreign investment in and support for the United States.
A good friend of mine works for Scott's (the first company to not hire people who smoke). He told me that the CEO used to see the same three women walk across the parking lot multiple times each day to have a smoke. For one month, he kept a tally of how much money they had cost the company and projected it over their entire tenure with the company, fired them on the spot, and haven't hired a single smoker since.
Not surprisingly, their health care costs have been reduced accordingly.
They should probably fire everyone over 50; they tend to have more medical problems. Also overweight people. Better do genetic testing to look for expensive potential diseases. Mandatory drug and alcohol testing. Actually, just bring your medical records to HR once a year for review. Welcome to the brave new world.
Read my above comment about self-inflicted poor health. What we're talking about here is personal accountability. If you have a hereditary predisposition to something, you cannot control that, and should be part of the actuarial process. But self-inflicted lifestyle decisions (smoking, obesity) are not only controllable, but also much more significant than age or any other variable you wish to isolate.
And I've never said people SHOULDN'T eat, drink, or smoke. I'm just saying they should be responsible to their individual costs. Freedom ain't free if I'm carrying the tab for it.
I thought your post was about reducing insurance costs. All my suggestions do that. I left out the weekly cholesterol testing, which I assume you would approve. After all eating meat is 'self-inflicted' isn't it?
Meat, self-inflected?
Excess red meat, yes. I consume 10-12 pounds of chicken and/or turkey breast each week, allowing myself one weekly indulgence of a well-prepared steak with a good glass of bourbon.
What our society lacks is balance and/or moderation. The person who eats heavily processed cereal each morning for breakfast, refined grains for lunch, saturated fats for dinner, and pure sugar after 8:00 has become the norm, not the anomaly. Hence, America's health (care) crisis.
10-12 lbs of poultry a week, eh? Unless it is organic and grass fed then you will be likely to develop a neuro-degenerative disease since all processed poultry contains toxins from all of the Anti-Biotics that they are injected with, not to mention all of the growth hormones that they are given. Not to mention all of the toxic microbial infestations that most processed poultry carry.
I am a smoker who only eats fruits and vegetables, and organic food. I filter my water through a gravity fed filtration system to rid it of fluoride and other contaminents.. I don't drink coffee or soda, occaisionally drink alcohol and never eat fast foods. My wife is a registered nurse with 20 years experience.
We get very detailed physicals every year. My stats always come back as showing that I am healthier than my wife who does not smoke. (Blood work results, vital signs,...etc.).
I get a kick out of self righteous ass clowns like you who think that they are healthier than others. Do you use soap and shampoo with Sodium Lauryl or Laureth Sulfates? If so you are more likely to contract some type of skin cancer than I am. Do use under arm deoderant with Aluminum components? You will be more likely to contract Alzheimers Disease or some other neurological disease than I. Etc, Ad Naseum!
But here I am, a healthy smoker who is going to have to pay for all of your poor lifestyle choices.
Great, so we'll race to the grave. In the meantime, I'll keep turning women's heads while you keep waking up next to your unhealthy registered nurse with 20 years experience.
¡Salud!
Oh, O.K. Apollo, well then you can live in your delusional dream world with your throngs of imaginary lustful women and I wil live in my real world with my very real and very beautiful healthy wife.
For someone who seems to have this captivating power over women you sure do seem to prefer to spend an inordinate amount of time on the computer commenting in forums. My last comment here on ZH was 7 weeks ago. Testament to the fact that I have a busy life with little time for this baloney!
But anyhow, I have to go now to my real business that I own, you are probably on some other site by now anyhow. But if you ever get out of your parents basement, get married, have kids and start a business then you will finally be living in the real world. Here's to you, dude!