What's new
By:

Mark Cuban's afraid of the witchhunt. he might think he is next target of the witchunt

Peer reviewed analysis. You were saying?

Conclusion: Although effective obesity prevention leads to a decrease in costs of obesity-related diseases, this decrease is offset by cost increases due to diseases unrelated to obesity in life-years gained. Obesity prevention may be an important and cost-effective way of improving public health, but it is not a cure for increasing health expenditures.
Click to expand...

https://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029
 
heyhey said:
Actually as I pointed out with smokers fat people, due to their propensity for dieing early, are actually less costly for the government and the healthcare system. It is the health nuts that live to age 90 breaking hips and managing Alzheimers that are so damn expensive.
Click to expand...

Your ability to "point it out" doesn't make it true.

If by "managing Alzheimers" you mean the cost of assisted living, yes it is expensive, but you underestimate the cost and longevity of people with chronic illnesses brought about by overeating, smoking, and other bad habits...heart disease, diabetes, cancer.
 
PearlWatson said:
Your ability to "point it out" doesn't make it true.

If by "managing Alzheimers" you mean the cost of assisted living, yes it is expensive, but you underestimate the cost and longevity of people with chronic illnesses brought about by overeating, smoking, and other bad habits...heart disease, diabetes, cancer.
Click to expand...

My ability to point it out absolutely makes it true. If you read carefully(lol) you will see that the chronic illnesses to which you refer are referenced. They are just simply less expensive than the long term and particularly expensive healthcare that the elderly need. I am not pro fat. I am pro truth. You as a self proclaimed conservative should see the folly in using social cost benefit analysis to make personal decisions for others.

If we were to make our decisions in such a way we should encourage risky behavior, ban airbags, and slaughter the handicapped. The hilarious thing is that you don't see how oppressive and close to the Eugenicists your particular form of shallow, ignorant, and down right nasty conservatism is. People like you sully the reputations of all people that consider themselves conservative.

Do the Republican party a favor shut the **** up and don't bother turning up to vote until you have finished your first chapter book.
 
heyhey said:
My ability to point it out absolutely makes it true. If you read carefully(lol) you will see that the chronic illnesses to which you refer are referenced. They are just simply less expensive than the long term and particularly expensive healthcare that the elderly need. I am not pro fat. I am pro truth. You as a self proclaimed conservative should see the folly in using social cost benefit analysis to make personal decisions for others.

If we were to make our decisions in such a way we should encourage risky behavior, ban airbags, and slaughter the handicapped. The hilarious thing is that you don't see how oppressive and close to the Eugenicists your particular form of shallow, ignorant, and down right nasty conservatism is. People like you sully the reputations of all people that consider themselves conservative.

Do the Republican party a favor shut the **** up and don't bother turning up to vote until you have finished your first chapter book.
Click to expand...

lolz

Scale back the extrapolation and wipe the foam from your mouth.
 
PearlWatson said:
9/11 didn't effect me personally but I'm still against Muslims flying planes into buildings.

Now before you get all obtuse and think I'm making a direct comparison I will state the point straight out.

You can legitimately be against actions because of the way they effect other individuals, communities, and society overall when they will never effect you personally.
Click to expand...

Did you just draw a comparison between gay marriage and the wanton killing of 3000 individuals?
 
DutchJazzer said:
the whole ****ing society is affected by those morbidly obese people(at least healthcare wise), they make healthcare expensive.

sometimes things indivudials or groups of people do affects everybody in some way.
Click to expand...

You can name a link between obesity of others and your pocketbook. What's the link for gay marriage?
 
One Brow said:
You can name a link between obesity of others and your pocketbook. What's the link for gay marriage?
Click to expand...

One could argue that it opens the door for financial benefits associated with marriage. Such as insurance and social security. That hits Mr. Public in the pocketbook.

One could argue the affects Mr. Public with small business lawsuits.

One could argue that it affects Mr. Public in what their children are taught.

One could argue that it affects the overall moral makeup of America and that affects Mr. Public.


I won't make those arguments but one could.
 
Stoked said:
One could argue that it opens the door for financial benefits associated with marriage. Such as insurance and social security. That hits Mr. Public in the pocketbook.

One could argue the affects Mr. Public with small business lawsuits.

One could argue that it affects Mr. Public in what their children are taught.

One could argue that it affects the overall moral makeup of America and that affects Mr. Public.

I won't make those arguments but one could.
Click to expand...

I'll grant the first one. Not sure how the second and fourth come into play, and the third, in the eyes of a defender, would probably sound more like a request for special treatment than any truly relevant argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top