Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwawaylinux | Hacker News Reader

Incredible. All these ifs and buts to try twist the situation into exactly the shape that suits you.

> The load on the medical system from obesity is largely predictable and stable. It's no comparison to how COVID overwhelms the medical system.

And yet I made the comparison. Both increase load on the healthcare system.

> Nobody is going without necessary surgery or treatment because some other people eat too much food from McDonald's.

Do you have a source for this claim? It's commonly knowledge now that overweight people are a significant burden for the healthcare system, and it is also known that hospitals have had resources shortages, ambulance wait times have been too high, etc at various time in the past. You seem quite sure of yourself that by some miracle of chance, none of that additional load due to obesity has ever caused someone else to have a less favorable outcome.

View on HN

You're being incredibly argumentative and rude.

How? Because I don't let implausible and unfounded claims go unchallenged?

I get the feeling that you wouldn't be quite so irritated with me (or at least less inclined to contribute nothing but namecalling) if you were capable of forming a coherent argument against what I wrote.

I'm trying to let you know that you're being unpleasant to the point that it doesn't seem worth forming an argument.

And yet plenty of people are attempting to, aren't they?

I think in fact it is actually that you don't have one, and that is what is making you angry, not my attitude

I wasn't mad before, but yes your comments are upsetting. Good luck with that.

If you find yourself getting upset by something you disagree with, and are unable to explain why it is wrong, it might be helpful to have a more open mind. Or at least be more tolerant of different opinions. Just a suggestion. In any case I hope you feel better soon.

it's a logical fallacy to argue that because we don't do X already, we don't need to do Y because it's similar.

The reasons for not doing X (treating obesity as an epidemic and with the same harshness and forcefulness as covid) is that X is an existing, slow moving beast.

The covid situation is much more urgent. Making forceful vaccination would have immediate effects and begin a recovery of sorts.

> it's a logical fallacy to argue that because we don't do X already, we don't need to do Y because it's similar.

Sure, but it's reasonable to use to ask people who think we should do Y but not X to explain their justification and reasoning.

> The reasons for not doing X (treating obesity as an epidemic and with the same harshness and forcefulness as covid) is that X is an existing, slow moving beast.

> The covid situation is much more urgent. Making forceful vaccination would have immediate effects and begin a recovery of sorts.

I don't accept that as answering, I know they are not exactly 100% identical in every way, but there are enough similarities that I think it is reasonable to ask the question and I don't think I have seen any satisfactory answer other than this kind of thing which just points out where they are different.

Yes, there are some differences. No, just listing differences is not actually a reasoning for why they must be treated differently. I want to know why those differences matter, or at least what the criteria is.

It's much more urgent? How much? What are the numbers? Are you claiming the benefits to social health and the healthcare system from mandating overweight people to lose weight is less than covid, and what are your numbers? Under your criteria, after covid is under better control or endemic would we then move on to weight loss mandates? How about drug tobacco alcohol mandates? Ban extreme sports? Ban driving of cars made before 2011? Cut speed limits in half everywhere? Ban poor people from having babies?

What's the criteria and where does it end? These aren't extreme examples, you're looking to justify forced medical procedures here so I don't think it's even slightly unreasonable to ask for some pretty rigorous parameters and justification for this step. Not just handwaving about urgency (which is of course one of the staple justifications for all atrocities, e.g., Iraq).

> Under your criteria, after covid is under better control or endemic would we then move on to weight loss mandates? How about drug tobacco alcohol mandates? Ban extreme sports?

well, instead of relying on another fallacy (that of the slippery slope and whataboutism), why not judge an action by it's own merits?

I have no opinions on the obesity epidemic, but i'm sure that it's a good idea to try solve it. No one is arguing that they shouldn't, but for the costs involved.

At the moment, the pressing issue is covid. And the solution, which may seem "drastic" and "invasive", is deemed necessary by a majority of medical professionals - and indeed, looks to be fairly safe so far. A reasonable person would agree that taking the vaccine is both good for themselves personally, and good for the general health of society.

Mandating that vaccines be taken, or be excluded from certain public activities, is an incentive that can be used to push people over the fence, and i would agree that it's not an overreach of the state to implement such an incentive.

What merits? You haven't explained them. That's the whole problem.

The concern is just seeing a problem and thinking forced medical procedures are the right solution. Handwaving about urgency doens't cut it. If it can't be explained exactly why this is needed, why it can't be achieved without that coercion, what criteria need to be met, etc. then there has not been enough work done to justify it.

You say covid is urgent, so what if we find rates going down in future and therefore urgency reducing? Under what circumstances would forced vaccinations no longer be necessary?

This exchange is increasingly unhinged. Covid should not be addressed because obesity is a problem and because the US invaded Iraq?

> This exchange is increasingly unhinged.

I can understand how it must appear that way to you.

> Covid should not be addressed because obesity is a problem and because the US invaded Iraq?

No. You're way off.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com