99% of obese people are obese by choice. (The 1% that aren't are people who lack the mental ability to control their food intake.)
I hope we never spend the public's money on this.
Are you willing to make the same claim about other addicts, smokers, alcoholics, drug users, sex addicts, and so on and so forth?
In all cases when you perform a behaviour your brain releases chemicals which make a person feel better, these chemicals which should be associated with behaviours which improve survival prospects can become addictive (in particular in a world where we have unnaturally high access to things which were scarce during our evolution, like rich foods).
Now in the cases of illegal drugs this is the intended effect, and without argument they're some of the most addictive substances we know of.
But it is utterly absurd to simply dismiss the mental health aspect (addiction, depression, etc) of obesity and call it a straightforward choice. It might be a choice to you and I, but by definition we aren't addicts. Just like with alcohol or sex, we can do it without the need or drive to OVER do it, addicts cannot...
I do find in recent years and completely against all evidence, bigotry has come out strongly against people struggling with food addiction. I legitimately feel like it is nothing more than attacking the mentally ill, nothing more.
As an addict, yes. Every time you indulge it is a choice... Just like every single one of the 100 OCD times I check if my door is locked at night is a choice... If someone walked up to me and said "I'll give you 20$ to not drink today" I'd not drink that day, it would be annoying and I probably wouldn't be able to fall asleep for a long time, but I would do it. And if you want to claim that "doesn't make you an addict" well then, I guess I don't know what you call it when you drink at least a 6pack or a bottle of wine a day for 10 years is.
>Now in the cases of illegal drugs this is the intended effect, and without argument they're some of the most addictive substances we know of.
Nice blanket statement. I'd love to see someone get addicted to Mescaline or LSD; I'm fairly positive it's impossible. Not because of a physiological argument, it would just be downright mentally excruciating, just 3 days in a row and I toss the towel. And it's just obviously not the intended effect for lots, like rohypnol, ketamine, dxm.
And go ahead and strike that "illegal" bit out. If you think your doctor writing a little rx for it makes it not addictive (in many cases intentionally addictive), you're wrong. And what makes coffee different from coca? What about the neuroeffects of cocoa? You're entire life is drugs, drawing some silly line in the sand with "illegal" is just juvenile.
People who have no idea what they're talking about love to chime in on subjects like this. "Oh it's their choice" or "Oh it's impossible for them to make choices" or crap like that. It's a choice the same way studying maths for 10 hours before an exam is for most people -- yes, you can obviously do it, but most people give up after 15 minutes and just skim at their desk. No one runs around calling them mentally ill, when they are legitimately doing their entire life lasting harm by not becoming maths literate. And it's exactly the same chemical interaction, dopamine and serotonin pathways; you don't get that flowing with maths studying, but you do with video games or blasting bongs.
Addiction is a stupid label that people and politicians use to demonize behaviors that they dislike. I think that we should solve obesity the same way we solve smokers and other "distastefuls": public shaming, banning from public spaces, specially marked 'fat zones,' etc.
Spend a little more time hitting the books instead of the weights before posting stuff like this next time.
In this context: I have no health problems so its fine by me. Meanwhile it is a great injustice on others. Not to mention the fact that once you start allowing limits there will be no end to them. Can't walk, guess you can't fly. Too slow? guess you can't fly either. What happens if you ever end up having health issues?
Do you really think that 1/3 of the population is "weak-willed" or has other moral failings that means that their problem is not worthy of spending public money on? Solving the obesity epidemic is much harder than people simply becoming "better" or "choosing" to stop being obese. If this were the case less than 5% of the population would be obese.
_American_ population -- also extendable to Britain, Scottland, Germany. Not the world.
If you really think it's an epidemic, then it's a selectively first world epidemic. Like the 10 plagues. And just as ridiculous.
Calling this a "disease" or "addiction" is moronic. You want to not be fat? It's not a fucking secret how to not be fat.
Now your probably thinking "Fuck this guy". Guess what, your addicted to whatever that was. An addiction is an addiction no matter how much your religiously deny it. To call it a disease is debatable, but unimportant.
Finally, anything that Quacks like a duck and looks like a duck is a duck right? Well then if lots of people die from a thing, and it is easily linkable to obesity, than clearly treating it like a plague is justified.
Thanks for saying, but that's a little in opposition to what you said earlier (that it is a "choice"). By definition the mentally ill don't choose to be that way (and by extension neither do the obese).
I feel like we've tried and tried to address obesity with diets, but that's like trying to stop a sinking boat by bailing out water. Bailing water might keep you afloat for longer, but it doesn't plug up the leak that got you there to begin with.
Obesity is the same. Diets might keep them "afloat" for longer, but without dealing with the underlying addiction that caused the problem to begin with, you're only delaying the problem not solving it.
Which isn't to say there are easy answers, but some studies have used a combination of counseling, antidepressants, and monitoring to achieve compelling results[0]. It isn't a magic bullet however.
PS - You can either come at addicts with hate/disdain or sympathy/compassion, I choose to do the latter. "There but for the grace of God go I"
[0] https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/press-releases/2011/nih-studi...
That's pretty rude and inconsiderate.
I'm not overweight, I exercise for at least 90m a day, I run about 50 miles a week, and I have type 2 diabetes.
It runs in my genes. It absolutely sucks.
People who are addicted can "quit any time they want". If you have ever known an addict, and tried to get them to quit, this is a common phrase that you will hear them say. When they actually try to act upon their words they will nearly always be unable. They are so deeply ingrained in the habit, escape, or feeling of their addiction that they cannot escape it. Even if they do beat the odds, the chances of relapsing are just as high.
To make matters worse, a lot of people don’t recognize addiction as an illness. They seem to think that being addicted is a choice and that a person deserves everything that they are doing to themselves. Rather than assisting them in getting help, we pass the blame to the person who is addicted and tell them that they are there by choice and that they should just “STOP”. This leads to them not being able to turn anywhere for help because they can't be addicted, they are doing this to themselves, and so they continue to consume their addiction and hate themselves for it.
So now we turn the topic back to food addiction. We have a bunch of food addicts who have nowhere to turn because their addiction is not acknowledged. Hell, their addiction is downright shameful in the public eye. At least if they were addicted to heroin or cocaine people would understand, but since it’s food, no one does. Even though everyone every day sees addicts all around them in America. Even though lots of people are addicts themselves.
Sure they can try to eat less, or be told to eat less but it won’t help. No one believes that it is an addiction and no one will even acknowledge his or her pain. So they go deeper into their addiction. This is further compounded by that fact that corporations want them to consume more and more. If heroin was legal, and nobody saw heroin as an addiction, you can bet that we would have tons of heroin addicts everywhere. The companies would sell it as the new wonder drug, and everyone else would support them in their mass genocide.
Now even if we assume that it is a choice (which I disagree with), should it not be in the best interest of the public to keep companies honest? To force them to test everything that goes into consumer products rigorously before it hits the shelves? Why should money not be spent to keep the corporations from killing/maiming people second/first hand? Why do we protect corporations and not people? Why does an entity have more rights to live than a human?
Furthermore, it is ridiculous to say that we should never spend the public’s money on an issue that consumes and claims so many lives. Should we not try to find a solution to cancer because it does not affect you or others around you? Yeah we should only do that when/if you get it (/sarcasm). Any research or solution to a problem that is claiming a lot of lives is worth the time and money of the public. Who knows how many geniuses have come and gone because their life was snuffed out early, due to vehicular accidents, food, or other addictions? Who knows how much of peoples’, and by extent humanities’, time has been wasted by poverty and addiction. Why is apathy and scorn the norm for other people? Why can’t we just be compassionate and do our best to help everyone? Why can’t we just care?