|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: New York plans to ban sugared drinks over 16 oz.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justin Hamaker
Film God
Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 06-03-2012 03:18 AM
Randy, one of the reasons why we have such a budget/fiscal crisis in America is due to entitlement programs - such as MediCare - which consume a large portion of the budge. There are many reasons why these entitlement programs are in trouble, but one of the reasons is because too much is being spent to treat expensive health conditions like diabetes.
Americans don't seem to understand that part of the reason we spend so much on health care is because we don't do enough preventative care. If we placed more emphasis on early detection and healthy living, we would spend less money treating late stages of disease. If we focused on healthy living, we would improve quality of life and productivity because of fewer lost work days from injury and illness. But as Americans we don't want to hear that nonsense. We want to government out of our lives when we're making unhealthy choices, but we want our Medi-Care and other government benefits when we can no longer take care of ourselves.
As I said before, issues like this soda proposal (and smoking bans and so forth) would be so much easier to dismiss if it was strictly a personal cause/effect question. But the consequences of our own health choices wind up having broader public health implications. And because of this, I do believe the government has a role to play. If we truly want to have the government stay out of our lives on these personal choice issues, then perhaps it's time for us all to give up on things like Medi-Care and Social Security. And maybe it's time to accept that if we live an unhealthy life and get diabetes, we will just have to die early if we can't afford our own treatments.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 06-03-2012 12:16 PM
The bottom line is that both Joe and Bobby are right. Politicians of all colours, as a general rule, go into politics because they think they know better than the rest of us and want the chance to put their theories into practice. Some genuinely believe that doing so will make the world a better place, while others just get off on exercising power. Going right down to the bottom of the tree, if you look at the kind of people who tend to run in students' union elections, parish council elections etc., right up to the leaders of the world's biggest economies, all of them tend to have one thing in common: the belief that they know how to run your life better than you do. Most of the time, they don't.
I also agree with Bobby on the public health issue, though, and largely through very personal experience, namely meeting and becoming engaged to someone who is vegan, teetotal and has spent more or less her entire life learning about and caring about food and health issues. Before then I wasn't the worst eater in the world (I don't think, anyway): possibly because I have always had a dairy allergy - if I eat anything with milk, butter, eggs or cheese in it the result is vomiting, nausea and other not fun outcomes, and so I've always been forced into a relatively low fat diet. But until recently, I'd always eaten quite a bit of red meat, probably because if you take dairy off the table, it's one of the few quick and easy forms of protein available. And I'd also been eating quite a lot of fried potato stuff, drinking prodigous quantities of coffee (very easily going through 2-3 pounds of coffee beans a week), and significantly more booze than government types think is good for you.
Two years later, for reasons I never guessed would materialise, my meat, fried potato (both fries and crisps/chips) alcohol and caffeine intake is probably down around 90%, with the protein intake being replaced by fish and protein-rich veg such as nuts, mushrooms and peppers. I might have a can of Coke once every couple of months (e.g. feeling a bit tired and still a couple of hours to drive - a situation like that) And I feel one hell of a lot better for it - less waking up in the night, able to concentrate longer and haven't had a cold or 'flu type bug in over a year.
But I really don't think you can force people to do what I did through the tax system. In Britain, the excise duty on cigarettes and most alcoholic beverages is increased in real terms (i.e. above the rate of inflation) year on year since the late 1990s, but sales of these products are not decreasing. In fact, there is evidence that people are cutting back spending in other areas to be able to continue drinking and smoking the same amount. And then the healthcare system (however it's run) has to pick up the tab. Ultimately, only public education can work. In 1950, three quarters of the population smoked: now it's a quarter (and has been, pretty constantly, since around the turn of the century: there appears to be a hard core 25% that just doesn't want to get the message). That has not been achieved by taxation (the inflation busting duty hikes of the last decade), but rather by gradually increasing public awareness as to what tobacco does to you (between around 1950-2000). It might take another half century for whole populations to take on board what excessively processed foods do to you, but, sadly, I can't see that happening any other way.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Redifer
You need a beating today
Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99
|
posted 06-03-2012 05:57 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
If the person is a high risk customer he deserves the price gouging he gets.
I have diabetes so that makes me a high risk for health insurance. So you're saying I deserve the price gouging because of my shitty genes? Things aren't as black and white as you make them sound. You also seem to take an elitist view of other people. Can people be healthier? You bet. Can everybody be perfectly fit? No way! It just can't happen. Not everyone can be thin. Everyone can't become vegetarians. For one, I absolutely abhor the taste of most vegetables. They need to make things that are good for you AND taste good. There's not a lot of variety in that area, unfortunately. For you, maybe, but everyone doesn't have the same taste and you can't expect them to. Most people who lose weight gain it back. Going back and forth like that has got to be tremendously stressful on the body. Also, the BMI index or whatever it is called, the one that decides if a person is officially obese by the amount of body fat they have, is royally messed up. I guarantee you that you and I are both morbidly obese by that index. Some fat is OK and actually healthy.
So I will go back to my original point: Stop subsidizing corn. To hell with the farmers. Nobody cares about them anyway. We have digital now. But please, continue to grow wheat and potatoes. Just calm the hell down on the corn. But again, like I said this will never ever EVER happen. Immediate money right now is more important than the nation's health. And NOBODY you vote into office will do a damn thing about it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic