Medicare redefines "obesity" as medical

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Medicare redefines "obesity" as medical
95
Fri, 07-16-2004 - 5:19pm

Very interesting article and

 

  Shawna

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-16-2004
Mon, 07-19-2004 - 10:55pm
Well said Erin - there is always more to a story than what people care to see.

Cheers

Lisa

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Mon, 07-19-2004 - 11:47pm

She is a shark freak.

 

  Shawna

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-06-2003
Mon, 07-19-2004 - 11:51pm
just butting in now and wayy OT but being a mythology freak...i get these spells when I get all caught up in something and have had one for mythology...so have you ever heard of Patricia Monaghan and do you liek her work /?
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2004
***spanks Shawna with a fin****
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2004
Oh boy...

Well, Shawna is right, I am a shark freak. Sharks and horses, those are my two obsessions. I love shark movies, have seen all of them, good and bad. The worst of them is where I drew my 'new' name from. On Lifetime, they had on Shark Attack I and Shark Attack II, both low budget with actors I never heard of. I am a purist right up there with Pete Benchley (JAWS) and am a dry land expert on sharky behavior. So you can imagine my delight and subsequent peeing of my pants laughing, when in this cheesefest of a movie, the sharks become agressive and begin to growl and bark.

They don't have vocal chords! And you need air to produce sound to project from the mouth (not like whale sonar)! Sharks have no air spaces in their bodies or a swim bladder (other fish do) and if they stop swimming, they sink.

So I am having a fit now at the atrocity of this mistake on TV, and my boyfriend Kyle says to me, "Can YOU bark like a shark?" and he tiggers off across the room singing "Bark, bark, like a shark!" and so THAT is where THAT came from...

Aren't you glad you asked? *giggle*

And if you are trying to picture me, (I will be posting my pics at some point), as a shark(Great White) I am a bit crosseyed and snaggletoothed, have a bit of a lisp, and physically resemble a stuffed Gund shark stuffed animal. My snout wrinkles up when I sniff at things *SNERSNERKSNERK*. When I 'bark', it is not like a true dog bark, but the word bark, and it sounds a bit warbly and bubbly.

Can you believe medication doesn't help this? BWWAAA HAAAA HAA!


Okay, going to let you recover now...

Amy

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-20-2004
Hi Amy,

(Are you still there? The "unidentified govt person" hasn't hauled you away yet?!)

I don't know whether the govt. is *trying* to make us fat, but the govt. is (as you say) a business. And I learned, in college in B-school, that the first rule of business is this: "Business is in business to MAKE money. Business is neither moral nor immoral and it's role is gaged simply by the ability to MAKE money." (See, my old professor would be so proud of me, remembering class day #1). Anyway, long ago and far away, I grew up on a farm and my dad (long since deceased) would always talk about the govts hand in his farming affairs: how the govt. would pay you to let fields go empty, and how you would be rewarded with govt subsidies for growing products like corn, for which we already had too much surplus, but penalize the farmer for "doing his own thing" and growing other produce (more needed) which was not so plentiful.

And it's also true, that until the 1960's, obesity was no where near as common and one of the reasons for that was the relative scarcity (and expense, when it could be found) for processed food. Remember that tv-dinners did not even exist until mid-1950's, and before women entered the work force in large numbers what America had was basically a lot of home cooking!

Our govt. subsidizes tobacco growing, in the South (and then penalizes tobacco companies for it's product), and sugar cane/sugar beet growing both South (cane) and North (beet), and our govt has sponsored, and rewarded with HUGE grants, those companies which create more and more processed food. An interesting aspect of that: Kraft foods which, on the one hand receives massive $$$ for the research and development of new processed foods in order to use up the govts abundance of corn etc, and on the other hand (since Kraft is an arm of RJR tobacco) is slapped with fines for tobacco. Go figure. The same to keep peanut farmers in business, and happy, in the South. And you know, until the diet "craze" much of our country is now under, in the *old days* soy beans were used only for animal feed. Now just look at the market, and notice all the human food products from soy!

I read something interesting about this decision to define "obesity" as medical for medicare: It won't have much impact (for the time-being) on obese people, because in order for medicare to dole out $$ to individuals, the given *care* has to be medicare approved, and in order for that to happen, the govt would have to have A LOT more of our taxpayer dollars (taxes would go up) in order to funnel into medicare, for research, to PROVE such-and-such treatment was fundable. Get my drift? For many years, the govt would need to give the public health branch (medicare et al) money to fund research, and it would mean more research grants to university medical schools (which typically test for the govt), but that's about the extent of it.

forte

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-20-2004
She didn't say that, Erin. That seemed far out of left field. Where did you get such an idea? Curious.

Obesity is caused by consuming more calories that the body uses for fuel. All the studies in the world haven't changed that one jot. We know that. And really, it's a personal matter not requiring *big brother* in terms of govt intervention, and tax increases for medicare IMO too.

forte

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-26-2003
She claims to know the obvious answer to the obesity epidemic. Perhaps in my zeal to learn the answer I put some words into her mouth.

Still interested to see what is so obvious.

Erin

http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics
Mom
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2004
WOW. The gov't is a scary entity to some extent (and they haven't hauled me off yet!). The corn that is subsidized...that is to feed beef cattle to fuel the beef industry because if we actually used all that land to grow things for PEOPLE, it wouldn't make as much $$$.

What you said definetly has a point and it's just kind of a shame that this is the way it works, thats all. And until the advent of things like TV dinners and prepackaged prepared foods (high in fats and sodium to preserve shelf life and enhance flavor).

Some thing, some where, has to give.

Amy

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-20-2004
Well, it's also to ship overseas. And it's my understanding that the govt. subsidizes corn (and other things) to promote the development of new foodstuffs here at home (including convenience products). I'm not a very political person, but I can remember my father (who farmed, and didn't like so much govt intervention) complaining about it, and discussing it with other farmers.

I think, personally, one of the things that "has to give" is the way we as individuals approach food. It's not all about the govt, after all. I mean, if there were NOT so much demand (from the public) for more and better convenience products, then the production (and the amt our govt spent on development) would scale back. I mean, business (all business) operates on a supply-and-demand model. And that includes our govt, which as you said, is really a business. If there were no demand, there would be less supply. And that precisely because ALL business is IN BUSINESS to MAKE MONEY.

When we start demanding fresh produce, better quality, and scale back on prepackaged foodstuffs, and when/if that happens on a large enough scale....the market will follow.

So much for my "lessons" in b-school!

forte

Pages