Posted by cccp1014 on 2/5/2019 12:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/5/2019 12:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/5/2019 12:31:00 PM (view original):
It's not naive. It's the truth. Some people have to work harder than others, but anyone can do it. Saying they can't is naive.

By the way, I pay $19 for a 10 lb bag of boneless, skinless chicken. That comes out to less than $1/piece. As I said, it's cheap.

It's 100% naive.

Some people can lose weight. Most who do, gain it back plus some. Your body sets your fat cell count for life sometime around puberty. If you're unlucky enough to be overweight as a kid, chances are you can never shake it as an adult because you have a high fat cell count. You can shrink the fat cells with a good diet, but not get rid of them. And the fat cells are programmed to want to refill, so you'll literally struggle against biology for the rest of your life. Someone lucky enough to get through puberty without getting fat has a lower fat cell count. They have an easier time avoiding weight-gain as an adult and, if they do gain weight, have an easier time losing it.

Another factor is gut bacteria. There was a obese woman with some sort of nasty infection. She had to take a hard-core antibiotic to deal with the infection and it wiped out her gut bacteria. The doctors transplanted gut bacteria from her daughter (who was not obese) and the woman lost all the weight without changing her diet.

You're giving rare examples. 99% of the people are overweight due to poor diet, lack of exercise and lack of will power. I was super skinny as a kid so I had to work extra hard at the gym to put on weight. I could have stayed skinny. Conversely if I were obese I would work extra hard at dropping LBs by running, biking, sports, weights and a better diet. I don't care if you want to be fat and unhealthy but you should not paying the same for healthcare as I am. You pay more for life insurance. No one is arguing about that. Why?

The fact that that is a rare example isn't the point. The point is we don't fully (or maybe even partially) understand how gut bacteria works in relation to weight gain. Two people with the same diet can have significantly different BMIs due to their gut bacteria composition.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/5/2019 1:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 2/5/2019 12:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/5/2019 12:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/5/2019 12:31:00 PM (view original):
It's not naive. It's the truth. Some people have to work harder than others, but anyone can do it. Saying they can't is naive.

By the way, I pay $19 for a 10 lb bag of boneless, skinless chicken. That comes out to less than $1/piece. As I said, it's cheap.

It's 100% naive.

Some people can lose weight. Most who do, gain it back plus some. Your body sets your fat cell count for life sometime around puberty. If you're unlucky enough to be overweight as a kid, chances are you can never shake it as an adult because you have a high fat cell count. You can shrink the fat cells with a good diet, but not get rid of them. And the fat cells are programmed to want to refill, so you'll literally struggle against biology for the rest of your life. Someone lucky enough to get through puberty without getting fat has a lower fat cell count. They have an easier time avoiding weight-gain as an adult and, if they do gain weight, have an easier time losing it.

Another factor is gut bacteria. There was a obese woman with some sort of nasty infection. She had to take a hard-core antibiotic to deal with the infection and it wiped out her gut bacteria. The doctors transplanted gut bacteria from her daughter (who was not obese) and the woman lost all the weight without changing her diet.

You're giving rare examples. 99% of the people are overweight due to poor diet, lack of exercise and lack of will power. I was super skinny as a kid so I had to work extra hard at the gym to put on weight. I could have stayed skinny. Conversely if I were obese I would work extra hard at dropping LBs by running, biking, sports, weights and a better diet. I don't care if you want to be fat and unhealthy but you should not paying the same for healthcare as I am. You pay more for life insurance. No one is arguing about that. Why?

The fact that that is a rare example isn't the point. The point is we don't fully (or maybe even partially) understand how gut bacteria works in relation to weight gain. Two people with the same diet can have significantly different BMIs due to their gut bacteria composition.

Maybe or maybe one has to work harder to be healthier. You play baseball. You may be a natural curve ball hitter but I have to work at it. I don't just say, hell I cannot hit that pitch I quit.

But I agree with BL that we can't simplify obesity to 'eat healthy'. Even if it is only 1% where that isn't the case, as CCCP said, that's still 160k Americans. It's probably more. I have a high metabolism, so I can go to town at a fast food place and not gain much at all. My friend growing up lived with a bad poor family, and they ate fast food a lot, so he was obese growing up, which wasn't really his fault.

I understand both sides of that argument. If I am unhealthy, I am costing the insurance company more money than a healthy person. Simple economics says that the insurance company should charge me more. But health insurance is an unique market. If I am type I diabetic, I need prescriptions. I need doctor's visits. I did nothing wrong to put myself in that situation. I'm just not sure I am okay with people not being able to afford life-saving drugs because of an illness that is of no fault of their own.

Like I have said, obesity is the fat person's fault. It can be avoided. It costs $0 to exercise and you can eat nutritiously for relatively cheap, but there are a lot of disabilities in which you can do everything right and still get sick.

The point is that i'm okay paying a higher premium so that others don't have to.

Strikeout and CCCP, I challenge you to a race. We will all put, say, 1000 on who wins. The catch is, you two have to run the race backwards, hopping on one foot. You might say, "well, that's unfair" and I would say that if you lose, it's your fault because you tecnically were capable of winning no matter what.

Posted by bad_luck on 2/5/2019 1:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 2/5/2019 12:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 2/5/2019 12:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/5/2019 12:31:00 PM (view original):
It's not naive. It's the truth. Some people have to work harder than others, but anyone can do it. Saying they can't is naive.

By the way, I pay $19 for a 10 lb bag of boneless, skinless chicken. That comes out to less than $1/piece. As I said, it's cheap.

It's 100% naive.

Some people can lose weight. Most who do, gain it back plus some. Your body sets your fat cell count for life sometime around puberty. If you're unlucky enough to be overweight as a kid, chances are you can never shake it as an adult because you have a high fat cell count. You can shrink the fat cells with a good diet, but not get rid of them. And the fat cells are programmed to want to refill, so you'll literally struggle against biology for the rest of your life. Someone lucky enough to get through puberty without getting fat has a lower fat cell count. They have an easier time avoiding weight-gain as an adult and, if they do gain weight, have an easier time losing it.

Another factor is gut bacteria. There was a obese woman with some sort of nasty infection. She had to take a hard-core antibiotic to deal with the infection and it wiped out her gut bacteria. The doctors transplanted gut bacteria from her daughter (who was not obese) and the woman lost all the weight without changing her diet.

You're giving rare examples. 99% of the people are overweight due to poor diet, lack of exercise and lack of will power. I was super skinny as a kid so I had to work extra hard at the gym to put on weight. I could have stayed skinny. Conversely if I were obese I would work extra hard at dropping LBs by running, biking, sports, weights and a better diet. I don't care if you want to be fat and unhealthy but you should not paying the same for healthcare as I am. You pay more for life insurance. No one is arguing about that. Why?

The fact that that is a rare example isn't the point. The point is we don't fully (or maybe even partially) understand how gut bacteria works in relation to weight gain. Two people with the same diet can have significantly different BMIs due to their gut bacteria composition.

Again, you keep saying "they ate the same diet." Regardless of the cause, some people are prone to put on weight easier than others. People have to tailor their diet to their needs. Everyone can avoid getting fat or lose weight.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/5/2019 1:24:00 PM (view original):
I understand both sides of that argument. If I am unhealthy, I am costing the insurance company more money than a healthy person. Simple economics says that the insurance company should charge me more. But health insurance is an unique market. If I am type I diabetic, I need prescriptions. I need doctor's visits. I did nothing wrong to put myself in that situation. I'm just not sure I am okay with people not being able to afford life-saving drugs because of an illness that is of no fault of their own.

Like I have said, obesity is the fat person's fault. It can be avoided. It costs $0 to exercise and you can eat nutritiously for relatively cheap, but there are a lot of disabilities in which you can do everything right and still get sick.

The point is that i'm okay paying a higher premium so that others don't have to.

I am also uncomfortable with the idea of "the more you cost, the more we charge". Health insurance is not auto insurance.

Posted by tangplay on 2/5/2019 1:21:00 PM (view original):
But I agree with BL that we can't simplify obesity to 'eat healthy'. Even if it is only 1% where that isn't the case, as CCCP said, that's still 160k Americans. It's probably more. I have a high metabolism, so I can go to town at a fast food place and not gain much at all. My friend growing up lived with a bad poor family, and they ate fast food a lot, so he was obese growing up, which wasn't really his fault.

Sounds like it was his parent's fault. To say it was no one's fault is a fallacy. You admitted he ate a lot of fast food.

Looks like b_l is once again taking stupidity to only a level he is capable.
He is the one person loony enough to actually believe that someone who is healthy, exercises and makes good diet and habit choices should pay the same for health insurance as someone who is fat, sits on their azz in front of the TV eating chips and pizza and smokes and drinks.
Then again, I'm sure his 99% tax bracket will fund keeping those people alive to continue doing the exact same selfish, life-ruining and life-shortening activities.

Posted by tangplay on 2/5/2019 1:25:00 PM (view original):
Strikeout and CCCP, I challenge you to a race. We will all put, say, 1000 on who wins. The catch is, you two have to run the race backwards, hopping on one foot. You might say, "well, that's unfair" and I would say that if you lose, it's your fault because you tecnically were capable of winning no matter what.

This is a terrible analogy. It is nearly impossible to run a race backwards against someone forward facing. It is not impossible to eat healthy foods and exercise. Hell, exercise costs $0. There is no excuse for not exercising (people without legs excluded).

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/5/2019 1:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 2/5/2019 1:21:00 PM (view original):
But I agree with BL that we can't simplify obesity to 'eat healthy'. Even if it is only 1% where that isn't the case, as CCCP said, that's still 160k Americans. It's probably more. I have a high metabolism, so I can go to town at a fast food place and not gain much at all. My friend growing up lived with a bad poor family, and they ate fast food a lot, so he was obese growing up, which wasn't really his fault.

Sounds like it was his parent's fault. To say it was no one's fault is a fallacy. You admitted he ate a lot of fast food.

I didn't say it was 'no one's fault. It wasn't his fault.

Yeah, I think feeding your kid almost exclusively junk food is child abuse.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/5/2019 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 2/5/2019 1:25:00 PM (view original):
Strikeout and CCCP, I challenge you to a race. We will all put, say, 1000 on who wins. The catch is, you two have to run the race backwards, hopping on one foot. You might say, "well, that's unfair" and I would say that if you lose, it's your fault because you tecnically were capable of winning no matter what.

This is a terrible analogy. It is nearly impossible to run a race backwards against someone forward facing. It is not impossible to eat healthy foods and exercise. Hell, exercise costs $0. There is no excuse for not exercising (people without legs excluded).

Your argument 'it's still possible so it's fair' falls under this analogy.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/5/2019 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, I think feeding your kid almost exclusively junk food is child abuse.

His.dad was a felon and druggie. He was a good kid.

Not at all. We are talking about two totally different situations. They aren't even close. Take a step back and think about it. You tried to use the same argument with wealth inequality. It just doesn't work. I would suggest rethinking a better argument.