Half the people overweight = potential diabetes cases = how much health cost?

[donesprague]

Over the past 30 years we have seen the average weight of people increase. In the past month I learned of two people who had their sugar checked at different parties only to find that they were at severe risk. Both people went to their doctors and found that they have diabetes. That prompted me to think about the number of people who are overweight and are at risk with undiagnosed diabetes.

If half the people in the USA are overweight and half of them get or have diabetes, the health care cost could balloon in very short time. Let’s see; over 300 million people in the USA, if just 10% of them get diabetes in the next 10 years, that is 30 million cases of diabetes and 30 million people needing significantly more health care for diabetes and all the side effects.

If diabetes does or is about explode, what should be done?

We could advocate a policy of: Sit back and wait. Let those who are “directly” exposed face the consequences of their lifestyle. Ignore the impact to the economy that will hit most working class people who are indirectly exposed. Only the idle rich and the politicians will be spared. I appreciate the thinking of people who advocate making everyone responsible for their own behavior. That is; as long as someone only harms themself, let them be. We know that everyone who pays for their own health care also pays for health care for those who don’t or can’t pay. So I know that my family and friends and I will pay for the cost of diabetes of others. Some of the problem could be self correcting because those who get diabetes will probably live a shorter less desirable lifestyle.

Or, we could advocate a policy of nanny state which is: Pass laws to restrict the actions of people because they aren’t capable of thinking clearly about the unintended consequences of their own actions. Limit the production, distribution and consumption of food stuff that leads to overweight people resulting in diabetes. This approach is similar to the prohibition of alcohol and other recreational drugs that was attempted. We know the results of that approach. We had massive crimes associated with alcohol until the prohibition was reduced. We still have massive crime and cost associated with recreational drug activity. This approach also prevents everyone from enjoying things just because some aren't capable of exercising good judgement. It restrict the liberty of all in the name of supposed kindness of the governing few who determine the correct actions for all people.

Or, we could use the tobacco model which is: pass ever growing taxes on sugar and other food stuff that causes weight problems that lead to diabetes. We know the results of the tobacco tax approach. I quit smoking when cigarettes were sold from machines for 25 cents a pack. The cost is close to 20 times that price. When I quit, I was giving lectures 8 hours a day to large groups of professionals and frequently all of them were smoking. The cost issue is a big part of the equations in reduction of smokers.

We are faced with a probable pay later situation but we have an opportunity to try to get in the middle of the problem. We are already paying now in one or more forms. It is perhaps 30 years too late to get ahead of the problem. Oddly enough I criticized the punitive tobacco tax approach. I am more opposed to the legislation to prevent smoking in public places. Not so oddly I advocated health care premiums for smokers. We can’t legislate morality or intelligence. We can legislate an opportunity for an informed decision. That is; we can educate to lead toward intelligence and morality but we can legislate that people become intelligent or moral.

[AutoRacer55]

no fat chicks

[CaptC]

no fat chicks
God invented liquor because fat chicks need love, too..................:twisted:

[AutoRacer55]

fat chicks need love too.......................;-)

but they gotta pay

[CaptC]

but they gotta pay
Marines do NOT accept money for performing a Public Service....:D

[terri910]

I remember taking my grandmother to her doctor for a physical. After being weighed, he showed her the chart and said, "Here is your height on this line....as you can see, you weigh more than is recommended for your height."

She looked at the chart, found her weight and moved her hand over to the height column, looked at him and in dead seriousness said, "You can see right here that I do NOT weight too much. I'm just too short."



I loved how my grandmother could shut that man up.

[Striker8440]

God invented liquor because fat chicks need love, too..................:twisted:

God Invented Marines and Marines invented beer becasue we have compassion for those less fortunatie than us....


Semper Fi Capt

[MrShotShot]

In all seriousness, you do have a point and I'm not certain what the solution is.

From what my internest has given me to read and in our conversations, basically EVERYONE you see with a gut - particularly men - are at risk of developing diabetes.

[terri910]

In all seriousness, you do have a point and I'm not certain what the solution is.

From what my internest has given me to read and in our conversations, basically EVERYONE you see with a gut - particularly men - are at risk of developing diabetes.
Hey....life. NO ONE gets out alive.

[ImNewHere]

Gawd! Talk about blowing something out of proportion. Obamacare is going to fix it. Don't worry, he's got it under control. Look how he took the most deadly virus and marginalized it within a week or so. We are no longer worried about the swine flu because Obama really is the Messiah! Thank you, President Obama for fixing the swine flu virus so it won't hurt us!

He'll cure diabetes too. You just watch.

[AutoRacer55]

Marines do NOT accept money for performing a Public Service....:D

If she's got an ugly face, hello paper bag.

[ImNewHere]

If she's got an ugly face, hello paper bag.

It's just easier to call her a "butter face."

[Mental]

Gawd! Talk about blowing something out of proportion. Obamacare is going to fix it. Don't worry, he's got it under control. Look how he took the most deadly virus and marginalized it within a week or so. We are no longer worried about the swine flu because Obama really is the Messiah! Thank you, President Obama for fixing the swine flu virus so it won't hurt us!

He'll cure diabetes too. You just watch.


I think the messiah will soon have a cure for cancer, and mental illness to split opinions.
Never thought I would see the messiah in my lifetime. The man is truly the messiah.

[MrShotShot]

Hey....life. NO ONE gets out alive.

You're right, but a few more smart decision about what and how much you're shoving in your maw and a few minutes of exercise each day can lead to a much happier and healthier one.

[sironin]

I recall that someone wrote a book about this particular issue in which they blamed the food industry for deliberately exploiting chemical responses in order to sell more food. It brings a sort of sinister light to the phrase, "You can't eat just one" when you add on ", we made damn sure of that!"

Apparently certain combination's of salts and fats will always make your body want more of them, regardless of whether or not you're hungry or stuffed. Some may chalk this up to willpower, but I challenge anyone to eat a single potato chip and not (at least on some level), crave more. Even knowing this is the case doesn't help beyond trying to avoid such foods entirely (which is incredibly difficult concerning prepared food).

[donesprague]

I recall that someone wrote a book about this particular issue in which they blamed the food industry for deliberately exploiting chemical responses in order to sell more food. It brings a sort of sinister light to the phrase, "You can't eat just one" when you add on ", we made damn sure of that!"

Apparently certain combination's of salts and fats will always make your body want more of them, regardless of whether or not you're hungry or stuffed. Some may chalk this up to willpower, but I challenge anyone to eat a single potato chip and not (at least on some level), crave more. Even knowing this is the case doesn't help beyond trying to avoid such foods entirely (which is incredibly difficult concerning prepared food).

Interesting.

It seems that many suits against tobacco deal with some ocassional addatives to enhance the craving or the enjoyment.

Should we bring suit against the auto industry for making cars more desirable? Should we bring suit against companies for using advertisements that happen allow us to have "free tv" and "free network access"?

How do we know when enjoyment or desire additive prevents the individual from being responsible for their own actions?

[donesprague]

You're right, but a few more smart decision about what and how much you're shoving in your maw and a few minutes of exercise each day can lead to a much happier and healthier one.

It seems that many people have so much and it is so easy to get food, especially cake, pies, candy and so on.

40 to 50 years ago the abundance began to flow so people took it in and failed to work it out. It seems that many of us will be victims of our own success.

[MrShotShot]

It seems that many people have so much and it is so easy to get food, especially cake, pies, candy and so on.

40 to 50 years ago the abundance began to flow so people took it in and failed to work it out. It seems that many of us will be victims of our own success.

And the really sad thing is that you really don't have to deprive yourself of anything as long as you partake in moderation (one piece of pie vs the whole pie for example) and do minimal exercise.

Most people are shocked when they actually see what is considered a standard portion size. What is also shocking is how they actually feel full and satisfied after eating it.

[sironin]

Interesting.

It seems that many suits against tobacco deal with some ocassional addatives to enhance the craving or the enjoyment.

Being addicted to a cancer causing substance seems to be pretty good grounds for a lawsuit all by itself. Having a company add stuff to that cancer causing substance getting sued over that is a foregone conclusion.

Should we bring suit against the auto industry for making cars more desirable? Should we bring suit against companies for using advertisements that happen allow us to have "free tv" and "free network access"?

Invalid comparisons.

How do we know when enjoyment or desire additive prevents the individual from being responsible for their own actions?

When it is directly linked to harm that no sane person would knowingly inflict upon themselves if they weren't already under its influence and knew the dangers involved.

[ValricoKate]

Over the past 30 years we have seen the average weight of people increase. In the past month I learned of two people who had their sugar checked at different parties only to find that they were at severe risk. Both people went to their doctors and found that they have diabetes. That prompted me to think about the number of people who are overweight and are at risk with undiagnosed diabetes.

If half the people in the USA are overweight and half of them get or have diabetes, the health care cost could balloon in very short time. Let’s see; over 300 million people in the USA, if just 10% of them get diabetes in the next 10 years, that is 30 million cases of diabetes and 30 million people needing significantly more health care for diabetes and all the side effects.

If diabetes does or is about explode, what should be done?

We could advocate a policy of: Sit back and wait. Let those who are “directly” exposed face the consequences of their lifestyle. Ignore the impact to the economy that will hit most working class people who are indirectly exposed. Only the idle rich and the politicians will be spared. I appreciate the thinking of people who advocate making everyone responsible for their own behavior. That is; as long as someone only harms themself, let them be. We know that everyone who pays for their own health care also pays for health care for those who don’t or can’t pay. So I know that my family and friends and I will pay for the cost of diabetes of others. Some of the problem could be self correcting because those who get diabetes will probably live a shorter less desirable lifestyle.

Or, we could advocate a policy of nanny state which is: Pass laws to restrict the actions of people because they aren’t capable of thinking clearly about the unintended consequences of their own actions. Limit the production, distribution and consumption of food stuff that leads to overweight people resulting in diabetes. This approach is similar to the prohibition of alcohol and other recreational drugs that was attempted. We know the results of that approach. We had massive crimes associated with alcohol until the prohibition was reduced. We still have massive crime and cost associated with recreational drug activity. This approach also prevents everyone from enjoying things just because some aren't capable of exercising good judgement. It restrict the liberty of all in the name of supposed kindness of the governing few who determine the correct actions for all people.

Or, we could use the tobacco model which is: pass ever growing taxes on sugar and other food stuff that causes weight problems that lead to diabetes. We know the results of the tobacco tax approach. I quit smoking when cigarettes were sold from machines for 25 cents a pack. The cost is close to 20 times that price. When I quit, I was giving lectures 8 hours a day to large groups of professionals and frequently all of them were smoking. The cost issue is a big part of the equations in reduction of smokers.

We are faced with a probable pay later situation but we have an opportunity to try to get in the middle of the problem. We are already paying now in one or more forms. It is perhaps 30 years too late to get ahead of the problem. Oddly enough I criticized the punitive tobacco tax approach. I am more opposed to the legislation to prevent smoking in public places. Not so oddly I advocated health care premiums for smokers. We can’t legislate morality or intelligence. We can legislate an opportunity for an informed decision. That is; we can educate to lead toward intelligence and morality but we can legislate that people become intelligent or moral.
What kind of parties do you attend? :eh:

[ValricoKate]

BTW - there is another option.

Our insurance company issues free quit smoking drugs, hypnotherapy et al. as a carrot and higher insurance premiums for smokers as the stick.

The insurance company could go the same route w/ the fat, fat the water rats. Hypnotherapy, gym et al and higher premiums for BMI's over 30 or what ever.

I'd love a reduced rate to the gym.

[donesprague]

Being addicted to a cancer causing substance seems to be pretty good grounds for a lawsuit all by itself. Having a company add stuff to that cancer causing substance getting sued over that is a foregone conclusion.

Invalid comparisons.

When it is directly linked to harm that no sane person would knowingly inflict upon themselves if they weren't already under its influence and knew the dangers involved.

Wrong. Addiction isn't a reason to bring a lawsuit. Taking from another is a reason to bring suit. Only on rare occasions does one person force another to smoke. I have heard of kids forcing another kid to puff a cigarette.

For decades people have known that smoking could exacerbate a predisposition to get cancer. I know that bad laws allow the taking of money from legal manufactures of legal products because some people won’t deal with their own problem. Millions of people smoke but don’t get cancer. Likewise, millions of people don’t smoke but still get cancer. Smoking is simply one of the things that can provoke or exacerbate an existing predisposition.

When a person volunteers to smoke then cast blame on others for their actions, then there might be reason for the stock holders of tobacco companies to sue the people who seek to blame others for their own problems.

I quit smoking more than 40 years ago when the price was 25 cents a pack from a machine. I decided that I would quit so I finished the carton I had just opened. I never bought or smoked another cigarette. I know the reason for the “addiction”. When a person takes a puff of a cigarette, the drug gets to the brain stem in 7 seconds. Although some people smoke to help weight control, most people smoke to self medicate their depression. Perhaps smokers should sue to get easier access to other forms of medication that doesn’t have the cancer link.

Many people are addicted to sugar and or fat. Those things don’t just exacerbate a predisposition, they may cause problems where none might have existed.

[Old_Mil]

If diabetes does or is about explode, what should be done?

Banning the use of high fructose corn syrup in foods destined for human consumption would do a great deal for the health of Americans.

Restricting the liberty of others is not quite so difficult to do when paying for the consequences falls to society at large.

[donesprague]

What kind of parties do you attend? :eh:

Is this the use of humor to deal with an issue? Or is it that you are a recent collage graduate who hasn’t learned or mastered reading comprehension yet? Many people eventually learn reality after they have been out of school for a while.

I didn’t say I was at the partes.

I suspect the parties were typical parties with food and drink and lots of sugar and fat stuff. Apparently there was at least one person at each party who had consumed too much of the things that cause diabetes so they had their meter.

[donesprague]

Banning the use of high fructose corn syrup in foods destined for human consumption would do a great deal for the health of Americans.

Restricting the liberty of others is not quite so difficult to do when paying for the consequences falls to society at large.

There is an old saying: give me liberty or give me death.

Requiring bold labels is a middle ground approach. Let people consume products while being informed.

Applying premiums for health care based on behavior is a middle ground approach.

Let people know that they must pay for their own actions. They will be unhealthy and they will pay more dollars because of their actions.

However; A sugar and fat tax or health care premium punishes people who are able to consume without incurring a problem. I know that some would wish to do harm to those lucky ones.

[Pudge]

Obama has appointed a man who will solve this problem.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y130/MattInfernus/wilford_brimley-diabeetus.jpg

[Pudge]

BTW - there is another option.

Our insurance company issues free quit smoking drugs, hypnotherapy et al. as a carrot and higher insurance premiums for smokers as the stick.

The insurance company could go the same route w/ the fat, fat the water rats. Hypnotherapy, gym et al and higher premiums for BMI's over 30 or what ever.

I'd love a reduced rate to the gym.

I don't like that BMI is used as an indicator of health, it's simply not accurate. It doesn't account for muscle mass or general physical health on any level, and it was never intended to be an indicator of how healthy someone is.

Bodyfat percentage measured by hydrostatic means, cardiac stress tests, and other actual scientific measurements would be better to determine who is at greater risk than a chart that says if you're X tall, you should weigh Y.

[VA-165 Boomer]

President Kennedy had a program that required P.E. through school and including the freshman year in college. I remember having to run a mile in a required time. I wonder what happened to that requirement. It is sad what condition a lot of our school age children are in. BTW I've been type 2 for about 10 years. Advances are being made with diabetes but I don't know if there will be a cure in time for a lot of gradeschoolers.

[donesprague]

I don't like that BMI is used as an indicator of health, it's simply not accurate. It doesn't account for muscle mass or general physical health on any level, and it was never intended to be an indicator of how healthy someone is.

Bodyfat percentage measured by hydrostatic means, cardiac stress tests, and other actual scientific measurements would be better to determine who is at greater risk than a chart that says if you're X tall, you should weigh Y.

I basically agree. However; one of the purposes of a stress test is to try to provoke a heart attack. I know they also take some pictures to see how much if any blockage is visible.

You are correct about BMI and other pseudo science measurements being a problem. What actually is good health. It is different for different people based on many things. This reminds me of a similar problem I addressed about 30 years ago. When I was teaching specialists how to do system and network problem determination, I realized that many of the specialists didn’t have the proper skills to easily accept the complex technical training. I pointed out that we needed different levels of training from entry skills through intermediary to specialists. I conducted a skills analysis and restructure of the curriculum. The results was a set of three classes with specific entry and exit skills defined. I developed a basic class with entry and exit skills specified. I defined and co-developed both an intermediary and a specialists class with entry and exit skills defined for both. Based on your comments, I think you are eluding to the need for a health analysis for various levels with specific measurable aspects of health. The meaning of good health is different for various age groups related to different life styles and different genetics. When I was 18 years old, I ate enough for several people but weighed about 135 pounds and could to 30 pushups with my feet in air and just my hands on the floor. I could toss a 100 pound bail of hay 15 feet in the air. Now I can’t pickup a 100 pound bail of hay. Different age and diet and lifestyle make a big difference.

[donesprague]

President Kennedy had a program that required P.E. through school and including the freshman year in college. I remember having to run a mile in a required time. I wonder what happened to that requirement. It is sad what condition a lot of our school age children are in. BTW I've been type 2 for about 10 years. Advances are being made with diabetes but I don't know if there will be a cure in time for a lot of gradeschoolers.

When I was in grade school, we had active recess to calm the kids. When our kids were in grade school, we saw the recess activity limited and the use of drugs expanded to calm kids.

[RickRhetoric]

Americans should be happy they live in a country where everyone can afford to be fat.

[angelicmadrigal]

God invented liquor because fat chicks need love, too..................:twisted:

Excuse you?

[gobletoo]

since fatty foods are costing us billions and can damage our brains (http://www.pcrm.org/news/archive090409.html), we need to have a War on Obesity. We can establish the OEA (Obesity Enforcement Agency) and fund them with billions of taxpayer dollars. We can send billions to other countries to help them fight the manufacture of fatty foods. The OEA will have the mandate to arrest and seize the property of fatties, stage paramilitary home raids and shoot the dogs of the fatties. The OEA will also be responsible for raiding and shutting down medicinal doughnut dispensaries. Oh yeah, we need a Fatty Czar, too.

[donesprague]

since fatty foods are costing us billions and can damage our brains (http://www.pcrm.org/news/archive090409.html), we need to have a War on Obesity. We can establish the OEA (Obesity Enforcement Agency) and fund them with billions of taxpayer dollars. We can send billions to other countries to help them fight the manufacture of fatty foods. The OEA will have the mandate to arrest and seize the property of fatties, stage paramilitary home raids and shoot the dogs of the fatties. The OEA will also be responsible for raiding and shutting down medicinal doughnut dispensaries. Oh yeah, we need a Fatty Czar, too.

I hope that both the republicans and democrats don't agree. I suspect that if one party tries to go with your plan, the other party will fight them. It doesn't matter which party likes something first, the other party usually finds fault with the opposition plan.

[John2598]

Americans should be happy they live in a country where everyone can afford to be fat.

What's so wonderful about being fat? Even Rush has been on one diet after another, trying desperately to lose the fat.

[John2598]

Donesprague,

I think it would have been better if you had included all the diseases that are the result of poor dietary habits. For example, cardiovascular, cancer, osteoporosis, dementia etc..

In my opinion, as the rate of disease and the cost of healthcare increases, there will be a greater demand for nationalized healthcare. And at some point it's going to happen if we don't do something substantial.

If it does happen, who do we have to blame?

[notluzn]

Not all people that have diabeties are overweight. Some are active and very fit / eat well.

[donesprague]

Donesprague,

I think it would have been better if you had included all the diseases that are the result of poor dietary habits. For example, cardiovascular, cancer, osteoporosis, dementia etc..

In my opinion, as the rate of disease and the cost of healthcare increases, there will be a greater demand for nationalized healthcare. And at some point it's going to happen if we don't do something substantial.

If it does happen, who do we have to blame?

You did a good job of mentioning some of the myriad of problems associated with poor dietary habits. Further; the problems come from more than just diet. They come from overall poor life style and habits. We are daily bombarded with images that promote many of the wrong things. We need the freedom to produce even though that means advertisements and entertainment sending exciting instead of accurate informative messages. How can we expect to get accurate information in advertisements or entertainment when we have so much bad science along with formal education that is frequently slanted toward what a few people consider to be “politically correct “ instead of factually accurate.

Good health comes from genetics as well as lifestyle based on the individual. Some of the basics include a balanced died, some exercise, rest, companionship and good sex. The amount of each varies based on the individuals circumstances.

I know that some people will find fault with my suggestion that genetics and environment contribute equally. The analogy I have used for years addresses the relationship between computers and users. We could say that the computer is the genetics and the user is the environment. Consider a slow processor with just a little memory and a very fast processor with lots of memory. Then consider a novice user with little or no experience and a computer engineer with years of hardware and software experience. Give the big machine to the novice and you won’t get much out. Give the little machine to the engineer and you will get lots out. Then consider the results if we switch the machines and users.

Genetically, most people will turn out fairly good. The way things are today, environmentally, most people will have problems. For the most part, we need better education and easily available facts to allow people to make their own decision. We have our self to blame or thank for our health. If we end up with socialized medical coverage, we will have the sheep who follow their leader down the path to the slaughter house. The leaders get to turn through another door for their coverage so they don’t get slaughtered.

[Mithrastan]

Ban partially hydrogenated oils, monosodium glutamate, and high fructose corn syrup, and watch the diabetes rate plummet.