According to The Obesity Society, more than 64% of U.S. citizens are overweight (defined as a BMI above 25), more than 30% are considered obese (defined as a BMI above 30 when 18-24 is considered healthy) -- and childhood obesity has tripled in the past 30 years! Studies by American Sports Data indicate that 3.8 million people in this country weigh over 300 pounds -- and over 400,000 people carry 400+ pounds on their frame. And the U.S. Surgeon General reports that obesity is responsible for 300,000 deaths every year in this country. The average American walks less than five miles a week, eats more fast-food meals than home cooked, and weighs 20-30 pounds more than his counterpart in Europe, Asia, Canada, or any other part of the world.

Most Diabetes is of the type II variety which is directly related to BMI.

I carry more cheeseburgers and chocolate than I would like but I don’t blame anyone but myself. Neither do I look for the government to fix it. I could go on but sounds like facts are giving way to personal attacks. Maybe we might be better to end our discussion.

I’m definitely not God, not even with a little “g”. I’m just pointing out facts freely available to those willing to look. God never promised us a smooth flight, just a soft landing.

Jack, I think we all bring some good points and facts to this topic. Sure, it's personal, as healthcare demands our attention and tax dollars!

There was a long op-ed article in the WSJ today. If the analysis of the current healthcare bill version is correct, I am deeply concerned:

Change Nobody Believes In

A bill so reckless that it has to be rammed through on a partisan vote on Christmas eve.

Excerpted:

"...And tidings of comfort and joy from Harry Reid too. The Senate Majority Leader has decided that the last few days before Christmas are the opportune moment for a narrow majority of Democrats to stuff ObamaCare through the Senate to meet an arbitrary White House deadline. Barring some extraordinary reversal, it now seems as if they have the 60 votes they need to jump off this cliff, with one-seventh of the economy in tow.

Mr. Obama promised a new era of transparent good government, yet on Saturday morning Mr. Reid threw out the 2,100-page bill that the world's greatest deliberative body spent just 17 days debating and replaced it with a new "manager's amendment" that was stapled together in covert partisan negotiations. Democrats are barely even bothering to pretend to care what's in it, not that any Senator had the chance to digest it in the 38 hours before the first cloture vote at 1 a.m. this morning. After procedural motions that allow for no amendments, the final vote could come at 9 p.m. on December 24.

Even in World War I there was a Christmas truce..."

See here for the article.

concerns
 

The main concern of the latest senate version is crappy thanks to pro lifer Senator Ben Nelson(Nebraska), the insurance prostitute Senator Joe Lieberman(Conneticut), and a weak Senate leader Harry Reid (Nevada). Hopefully it will get better and closer to the House bill as it progresses to the next step.

re Obesity and Type II diabetes...it's a complicated issue and if you're not one of the lucky ones who can maintain a healthy weight without struggling, it really sucks. You're likely to be earning less, hired less often, judged more etc. Fast food is a problem, school lunch programs are a problem, people who have to work more hours or multiple jobs is a problem when they have less free time to exercise, let alone spend quality time with loved ones, computer games are a problem, lack of physical and nutritional education is a problem....it goes on and on. The solution is to give people opportunities to help themselves not punish them and drive them to worse situations that could cost the public more money because they are uninsured, going to the ER more, having more and more health issues spiraling out of control etc.

We all pay taxes for public education becuase it's a good for society as a whole. If you don't have kids or you insist on sending your kids to private school it doesn't exempt you from paying for public education. There's social security to help take care of our older population because it's good for society as a whole. Similar arguments can apply to a public health care option. Anti trust laws and consumer protection laws are intended to promote fair competition and public safety. Currently there are vitually no checks and balances on insurance companies and left unchecked and unregulated, they abuse the system in favor of making the rich richer and screw the people living on main street.

What one nurses' association feels about this pathetic bill:

http://tinyurl.com/y8joaft

Nobody asked but I am disappointed that Pres. Obama didn't fight tooth and nail for what he platformed on.

Wow?!
 

Thx for posting this...

"...NNU cited ten significant problems in the legislation, noting many of the same flaws also exist in the House version and are likely to remain in the bill that emerges from the House-Senate reconciliation process..."

:sus:

people need houses and cars and food and maybe a cell phone or two and can't get by without a big sreen hd tv. I say lets tax the rich, take all their money, so the rest of us don't have to pay for all these neccesitiesof life.

Mark

I read a report today that said fuzzy math was used to make the current bill revenue neutral. The government currently borrows money from future Medicare collections to pay bills today, sort of like regular people use a credit card. The thing is the proposed bill, according to the CBO, spends the same Medicare money twice making the bill not revenue neutral but a deficit. Some Senators said they would not vote for a Bill that was not revenue neutral. I don't fully understand all the levels of voting in the Senate but I thought they had 60 votes already cast.

There is so much not to like from both liberal and conservative sides of the issue. You would think that anything that involved 1 trillion dollars would be thoroughly examined before the vote. Why the rush?

A measly $1,000,000,000,000?
 

Well, it's actually more. Any way, back to us patients...

__________________________________________________ ______

What Doctors and Patients Have to Lose Under ObamaCare

Changes to Medicare will give the feds control of surgical decisions.

Democrats are touting the American Medical Association's endorsement of President Obama's health plan. But there's an important reason why the American College of Surgeons and 18 other specialty groups are opposed.

The plan's most tangible efforts to restrain medical costs are through its controls on specialist physicians. Based on the government's premise that they often make wasteful treatment decisions, the health-care legislation in Congress will subject doctors to a mix of financial penalties and regulations to constrain their use of the most costly clinical options. The penalties and regulations are aimed first and foremost at surgeons and the medical devices that they use, largely because that's where the bulk of spending is.

It all starts with the sweeping power that the Senate bill gives to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The agency will be given the authority to unilaterally write new rules on when medical devices and drugs can be used, and how they should be priced. In particular, the Obama team wants to give the agency the power to decide when a cheaper medical option will suffice for a given problem and, in turn, when Medicare only has to pay for the least costly alternative.

Full article in the WSJ here.

Thanks Harrison: very serious considerations.

From a "liberal" source. Dr. Benjamin Rush was prescient but I wonder if he anticipated this.

http://www.truthout.org/1224094

So ADR and the promise that it holds for so many might be granted or denied in favor of fusion by a government bureaucrat based on cost? Rather than selected by a doctor and patient based on what's medically best for the patient?