Comments on: Smoking or obesity: Which costs health plans more?

By: Jen

Jen — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 00:33:00 +0000

@Joe that is not the takeaway from this article! What I think is important, as do some of those commenting, is that obese people (just like smokers) should be charged more because they cost more. This doesn’t make smoking less dangerous! Look at the facts! It’s a study that came up with these results, and honestly as a smoker the author does not seem biased at all one way or another. He’s drawing attention to the fact that smoking has become a social taboo, there’s been a massive social/political movement the last ten years to ban smoking and increase the sales tax on tabacco products, but there isn’t one on obesity. He’s saying we should focus just the same, if not more, on getting people in our nation to lose weight.

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Wed, 09 May 2012 18:13:09 +0000

I am sorry MMAN, based on what you wrote it just seemed you were unaware of the distinction. I thought you would have liked to have known. Unlike your response to me, I originally addressed it very matter-of-factly without any snarkiness.
I appreciate it when others alert me to my mistakes so that I can avoid making them again in the future.

By: MMAN

MMAN — Wed, 09 May 2012 17:08:00 +0000

@Common Sense…they why did you bring up such a small nuance to correct me then? Sure I agree that it is common knowledge regarding obesity and it may not be the exact polar opposite of anorexia (but anyone with any “common sense” should have been able to tell that remark wasn’t for the purpose to say that they are) but for you to bring out the technicality like you did is not substantial for this conversation. I guess instead of using the word anorexia I should have used the phrase “anorexic looking” or even the words you have suggested to suit people like you who try to pick apart anything anyone says on here rather than grasping the major concept of what people are actually saying…even when it is evident. To clarify, your pointing those things out to me really takes nothing away from what I had said in the post even though you would like to believe otherwise.

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Wed, 09 May 2012 15:29:19 +0000

@mman You ask snarkily “Have you no knowledge of this?” Yes, I was aware that obesity is sometimes caused by a mental disorder (Not exactly a news flash. I am quite certain that everybody else on this board has been aware of this since middle school). And thanks for the suggestion, but I didn’t need to watch television to understand the problem. The fact that I did not bring it up does not mean I was “not totally correct.” (I was). I simply thought it was so obvious that it did not bear mentioning, but thanks anyway for trying to clarify.

By: MMAN

MMAN — Wed, 09 May 2012 12:39:33 +0000

@Common sense True, but the bottom line is both are unhealthy conditions but I must add in many circumstances obesity, while it is a physical disorder, it is often fueled by a mental disorder (call it overeating or whatever) just as the deathly thin look in anorexics are a result of their mental disorder. Have you no knowledge of this? Watch the health channels on television where people eat because they are addicted to food and can not control themselves just like the anorexic. Sorry, you are not totally correct on this one, you have just pointed out a minor nuance…at least for this conversation anyway.

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Tue, 08 May 2012 17:58:16 +0000

Just so there is no confusion, my original remarks were addressed to Joe, not the author.

@Joe Was your last comment sarcasm, because other than you I don’t see all these smokers that you speak of.

@MMAN FYI, anorexia is not considered the opposite of obese. I believe anorexia is considered a mental disease/disorder. Obesity is a phyical disorder. The opposite of Obese would be emaciated, malnourished or underweight. (these conditions may be caused by anorexia or some other reason).

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 08 May 2012 16:37:35 +0000

Great to hear from all the smokers who are happy to see that someone else is getting the heat for a change.

By: MMAN

MMAN — Tue, 08 May 2012 13:27:06 +0000

@Everyone on this thread…so let me get this straight, an article like this should not be published, even if it is true, so no one will feel bad about themselves? Who is calling anyone names? The only thing I’ve seen is the word obese used to describe overweight people. Those who were/are offended at this article are the one’s who are throwing the word “fat” around. Sorry folks, the word obese is the politically correct term used to describe this unhealthy condition, just like anorexia is used to describe the opposite end of the spectrum. I mean what should all of you propose we call it? Just not mention it, pretend the issue doesn’t exist? How can we as a society truly deal with the issue without publishing studies such as this and facing the issues? No doubt there is no room for name calling, rudeness, or hurtful behavior but by using respectful terminology (maybe we haven’t come up with this yet) I think we can deal with this issue like it should be dealt with.

To compare obesity with ethnicity as one has done, is just plain erroneous. While I realize that obesity in some- possibly many- circumstances is out of one’s control as it does have a lot to do with genetics and other health conditions, unfortunately it is also in many cases caused by behavioral choices as well (as is evidenced by the increase in the number of obese people). Ethinicity on the otherhand, can never be determined by the behavioral choices of the individual. It is truly a trait that we are born with in “all” circumstances.

But please let me also say that I never believe it is O.K. to discriminate against obese people by denying an obese person a position that they are qualified for based on the fact that they are obese. However, I do agree in charging them the higher premiums on insurance just as we do tobacco users.

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Mon, 07 May 2012 21:09:30 +0000

@Your translations are kind of a stretch. The study is simply identifying which of the two is a greater financial concern. The article indicates that since obesity is a far greater problem than smoking, more resources should go into fixing the obesity problem.

I must have missed the line that suggested it is “o.k. to smoke up”, I even read between the lines and couldn’t find that message.

You say “Honestly, this piece is so skewed with its implications about the study, and it’s urging that companies focus less on smoking and more on obesity…The fact is that both are dangerous and both need equal attention. Why elevate one over the other?”

Why would you suggest that we give equal attention to two problems of different size and scope?

Cancer and Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria are both dangerous diseases. Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria however only effects 1 in 8 million children. By your logic these diseases need equal attention because they are both dangerous. Should we divert half of all cancer research into Progeria research?

This article is not nearly as skewed as your commentary.

“I would be shocked if” you were not in fact obese and “tired of being bugged about it”.

By: Joe

Joe — Mon, 07 May 2012 18:02:51 +0000

Lucy,

The simple reason is that overweight people are the last subgroup that it’s still OK to discriminate against. It’s fine to say all fat people are lazy, weak-willed, unmotivated, stupid, ignorant, or even ugly. If you made the same claim about someone based on their ethnicity people would be up in arms about it. But if you change ethnicity to fat, there is no limit. You can make horrible jokes, call people hurtful names, and of course, employment discrimination against the overweight is not only tollerated and common, it is encouraged by articles such as this one. The fact is, there are a lot of bullies out there, and they love it when their target is not protected in any way. They would be just as happy saying people of this race are all thieves is or members of that ethnic group are all lazy but they can’t get away with it.