NP Rank:
You are fat—either cut it or we will
The first thing that government can do (We the People willing) is to penalize food producers that put unhealthy products on the market. Most of my health issues were self-inflicted, caused by eating poorly and failing to exercise sufficiently.
I had to take medicine to lower my blood pressure and cholesterol just so I could be healthy enough to start a good exercise program. That wasn’t enough.
I had to wipe out ALL processed wheat products and all products with added sugar. I stopped drinking the 2 glasses of wine and 1 glass of orange juice for breakfast. I introduced a protein smoothie in the afternoon.
I lost 10 lbs in a month and I am increasing my exercise with a target to lose another 10 lbs. People say I look great, but I can tell you that if you get back to the weight you were when you graduated from high school, then you are likely closer to where you should be. Once you have the right program, it is easy to stick with it.
Does the government have the right to punish fat people or people who eat poorly? I think they do – We the People have a right to expect and to impose more discipline on ourselves.
“Is Obesity the Government’s Business?
Watch—and participate in—the Slate/Intelligence Squared live debate on Feb. 7.
By Katy Waldman|Posted Monday, Jan. 30, 2012, at 5:37 PM ET
Doctors and public policy officials across the country have sounded the alarm about the obesity epidemic. More than one-third of American adults are obese—and another one-third are overweight—while rates for children have tripled since the 1970s. Obesity may put us at an increased risk for heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, cancer, stroke, and other illnesses. And aside from its human costs, among them mortality, morbidity, and discrimination, obesity is responsible for $150 billion annually in medical costs.
At the same time, however, new research suggests that the links between body weight and health are more tenuous than we thought. Some fear that a “moral panic” over fat will divert government funds and energies from real health concerns, such as hypertension. Others are wary about federal trespasses on their individual rights. Should the government intervene to stem the rising tide of obesity, or should the battle of the bulge be fought at home?
Four medical and health care policy luminaries will tackle these questions at the next Slate/Intelligence Squared U.S. live debate on Feb. 7 at NYU’s Skirball Center in New York City. We’d like to invite you to attend—we’re offering Slate readers a 30 percent discount on tickets (see below)—and we hope you will use the comments section of this article to submit questions for the debaters. We’ll pick the most interesting one, and moderator John Donvan will ask it at the event. Be sure to include your full name and hometown with your question.
The motion for the debate is “Obesity is the Government’s Business.” WebMD Chief Lifestyle Expert Dr. Pamela Peeke will partner with former U.S. Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher to support the motion that government has a role to play in fighting obesity. They will argue that federal initiatives achieve results private ones can’t match, and that the medical, economic, and psychological stakes of obesity are too high to ignore. Meanwhile, Paul Campos, a law professor and author ofThe Obesity Myth, will team up with Fox News anchor John Stossel to oppose the motion, contending that peoples’ waistlines are their own responsibility. For Stossel, the idea of government intervention conjures up scenes from dystopian fiction—agents snatching cupcakes from our hands or forcing us onto treadmills. Campos, less concerned about preserving basic American liberties and more intent on reducing the stigma associated with obesity, believes that the government should promote nutritious foods and active lifestyles for their proven health benefits, but leave body size out of the equation. “



Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (4)
at 15:27 on February 1st, 2012
Wow. You blame the lack of 'Big Brother' totalitarian government for the stupid life choices you greedily made. You blame the lack of big brother government for your lack of self-control and moderation. Now you want 'The People' to voluntarily submit to and encourage the development of such governing. You're no friend to man.
at 17:42 on February 1st, 2012
Part of the problem is life choices, the other part is being fed malarkey about what foods are healthy and not. The processed food industry is feeding us garbage. It is as addictive as cigarettes.
at 18:45 on February 1st, 2012
I have to agree with "thirty-aught-six". We're all adults and we know right from wrong, which is suppose to be passed down from generation to generation. To start bringing the government in so they can slap fines on the stores for what they sell because part of the population demands it, smells like China to me. We're all products of our environment and it's up to us as individuals to decide how clean we want that environment to be. Remember, you are what you eat.
at 14:16 on February 2nd, 2012
Oh, I agree - the government IS fat. It's a greedy, bloated, pustule-covered carcass that's been leeching the lifeblood from society with numerous programs of dubious constitutionality. If "we, the people" are willing, we can put an end to this tyranny by electing people who will reduce expenditures and keep the government from sticking it's pig's snout in things which are none of its business, and are not part of its constitutional prerogative. I'm talking about welfare, health care, social security, airport security, and the myriad other things that the insipid legacy of FDR have saddled "we, the people" with.Oh wait...you were talking about having Big Brother stick its nose in more peoples' business? Screw you, then.