Home Economics Obesity Really Is A Problem With The Fat Acceptance Movement

Obesity Really Is A Problem With The Fat Acceptance Movement

Author

Comments

When we have true and whole land whales announcing that it’s just absolutely fine to be twice and thrice a useful bodyweight for ones height then we do have this little problem with obesity. For obesity has costs which the rest of us have to carry. This is comparable to the costs of carbon emissions – we the general public have to pick up those costs of a private action.

That, at least, is the problem being alluded to here:

Concerns about causing offence to obese people will bankrupt the NHS and social care, councils warned as the cost of caring for the overweight rises.

It’s not so much causing offence as being afeared of 300 lb women chucking their empty ice cream cartons at you. And they’ve got a lot of them.

In a report published on Thursday, the LGA said weight-related stigmas needed tackling to help prevent increasing levels of obesity and severe obesity from having a significant impact on demand and cost pressures in adult social care.

Research shows that the yearly cost of council funded community-based social care for a severely obese person is nearly double that for a person with a healthy Body Mass Index (BMI), which equates to an extra £423,000 in annual excess social care costs for a typical council.

When we’ve a significant social movement dedicated to insisting that being 300 lbs overweight is simply an expression of delightful sassiness then yes, this is a problem.

At least, it’s a problem given the framing of the question above. For the reality is that obesity really does kill. That means that the state – us taxpayers – need to support the fatties for fewer years. That could mean higher costs overall, lower, and as it works out it’s lower. Yes, higher costs per year is outweighed by those fewer years and so less must be spent in total.

Meaning that the only real problem with obesity – there are no public financial costs to be carried as a result of these personal decisions – is aesthetic. Therefore easily solved, anyone more than 40 lbs overweight may only shop at Dorothy Perkins – job one.

SUPPORT US WITH A SUBSCRIPTION?

19 COMMENTS

  1. It’s not so much 300 lb women chucking their empty ice cream cartons at you, it’s 300 lb women chucking themselves at you.

  2. The same with smokers. The antis never considered the costs of the extended life spans of those who quit, only the costs of caring for the expiring who had continued the custom.

    • When I worked for Arthur D Little I had a colleague who’d worked on the report commissioned by Philip Morris for the Czech Government that crunched the numbers. When the report came out the **** really hit the fan because the senior management in the US hadn’t sanctioned the work. There was a lot of rowing back but he was adamant there has been no input from the client and the numbers were genuine.

      The full report is probably out there somewhere.

      https://money.cnn.com/2001/07/16/companies/czech_morris/index.htm

  3. I’m not unsympathetic to the drift of this piece, in that my sainted mother – who was a similar weight to Boris Johnson but only 4ft 10in ‘tall’ – died in her 50s having accrued little expense to the NHS. She raised four children who have devoted much of their (our) lives to pouring significant amounts of money into government coffers with little in return. If the fatties are happy with their lot, and continue to die reasonably early, then more power to their elbow.

  4. “This is comparable to the costs of carbon emissions”

    Hardly comparable, in that carbon dioxide emissions are greening the planet, whilst the over eaters are consuming much the CO2 enabled vegetation.

    Never-the-less the obese tend to be, being slow movers, less productive than the svelte, their early demise does then indeed lower costs.

    • I don’t think they get as large as they do by eating too much vegetation, although I suppose the cattle that make up the burgers will account for a lot.

  5. Why is there a “fat acceptance movement”?
    It’s just another attempt at bullying in the name of “Equality”.
    No-one can make me like the appearance of obese persons however much they rant and their rants are an offence against my personal freedom.

  6. “the yearly cost of council funded community-based social care for a severely obese person is nearly double that for a person with a healthy Body Mass Index (BMI)”

    Why not just spend a fixed £423,000 on everybody, the land whales get six months and then it runs out.

    • I would have thought they have an advantage over most people since they probably have their own gravitational field. I’ve seen some who are so big that light bends around them.

  7. Barks really needs to keep up with the latest.
    The establishment have been twisting themselves into pretzs to try to hide multiple tudies finding that Smoking has a major protective effect against Covid.
    This is as well as being a major protector against Parkinsons.
    So not only do smokers live healthier lives than bedwetting Karens, they get the pleasure of paying more in tax for the OURNHS for more years.
    So non smokers are freeloaders really, don’t you just love the cognitive dissonance.
    https://www.qeios.com/read/Z69O8A.13

    • Entertaining. My attitude to smoking is purely selfish, as I loathe breathing in cigarette smoke.

      But naturally, if I’m not being bothered, people can do as they wish. If they’re shortening or extending their lives for their pleasure, good luck to them.

      • When the smoking ban was being pushed through Parliament I got put in my place by the already much missed Raedwald. Whilst I was, and still am, against the ban I said that if we must have one I’d rather it was outside as there’s nothing worse than the person in front lightening a cigarette and getting a lungful of smoke.

        His retort was that he didn’t ask to smell my aftershave, deodorant or BO. A fair point I had to concede.

    • “Smoking has a major protective effect against Covid”

      I can believe that this is “statistically” accurate. People with dodgy respiratory systems who would have had a very high chance of being killed of by Coronavirus didn’t because they have already been killed off by smoking related diseases.

  8. John77. “No-one can make me like insert demographic of your own choice however much they rant and their rants are an offence against my personal freedom”.

    Bogan, not selfish at at all and my stance on smoking. Like you, and I would suggest, most who visit this blog, I don’t care what people do as along as it doesn’t affect me.

  9. “The establishment have been twisting themselves into pretzs to try to hide multiple tudies finding that Smoking has a major protective effect against Covid. This is as well as being a major protector against Parkinsons.”

    Smoking was (remains) one of the principle preventative measures against obesity. Name me anyone who has given up smoking and NOT immediately put on twenty pounds of blubber.

    • @ Bernie G
      My late father-in-law
      But he turned into a horrible anti-smoking jerk.
      As a life-long non-smoker I am much more tolerant

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

expunct

in British English
expunct (ɪkˈspʌŋkt)
VERB (transitive)
1. to delete or erase; blot out; obliterate
2. to wipe out or destroy

Support Us

Recent posts

Lordy Be, They’re Complaining About Edenred’s Contract Now?

Sure and nothing is perfect in this world but there does come a time when it's necessary to marvel at the glories of it,...

There’s Little Hope If Joe Biden Believes This Nonsense About Taxes

Joe Biden says something worrying in an interview with the New York Times. As if he actually believes this nonsense: A generous stimulus will actually...

Spraying Intellectual Effort Up Against The Wall – Alternate Corporate Valuations

As particularly silly attempt to redefine how corporations are valued. Via email, apparently only on Bloomberg terminals: George Serafeim wants to revolutionize the way businesses calculate...

Why Britain Should Never Declare A Climate Change Emergency

New Zealand has declared a climate change emergency - good for them then. Under which coal fired boilers will be removed from government offices....

At Least The Guardian Manages To Ask The Right Question This Time

Sadly, being The Guardian, it manages to give the wrong answer to the right question but still, we should all be happy with advances...

Recent comments