Too Fat to Graduate?

Remove all ads!

Oh dear. When I make sarcastic remarks you're supposed to reflect upon what exactly you've just said - not make it clear you just hate people that aren't like you.

 

I find it curious that apparently certain colleges in the US have physical requirements for graduating when it is of no direct relation to the vast majority of studies. I'd reckon that most people that are obese will know that they are and what they can do about it, but simply choose not to do so or don't feel sufficiently motivated to do so. A simple course will not change that.

A more effective method would be to start such education at young ages, but even then I doubt it would be very effective. Some (most?) people just don't enjoy exercising much. I do enjoy exercising and the feeling of zoning out through physical exertion (I like to think of it as being an endorphine junky) and that's why I exercise regularly, but there are many people that just don't like getting tired and forcing them to do exercises will just make it all the more likely that they will stop doing those the moment they're no longer required to do those exercises.

I agree with 8people that the BMI thing is plain rubbish. Even at the best of times, I hover around being overweight according to that index. With a BMI of 24 I would be trained pretty much dry - hollow-cheeked and sixpack kind of fat levels - and a supposedly healthy BMI of 22 would be downright unhealthy for me. On the other hand, I've known a girl that was about my height but weighed around 20 kg less than me, ending up with a BMI of around 19, but also perfectly healthy otherwise, just with a completely different body type.

I can sort of agree with your general point about it being a social issue, but isn't limited to just obesity. Your above reasoning could just as easily apply to smokers, and they don't have to follow a course to show them how to deal with stopping smoking.

Or we could take the social issue further.

The people from Tal's example that killed themselves on their bikes weren't a real burden for society as they (assumedly) died quickly, thus not costing society a great deal of money and not really needing correction. Obese people are generally argued to have more health issues, so one could then argue that they're putting more stress on the social system (economy wise) and should 'better' themselves.

Going further along that line of reasoning, one could also say that it would be better for the social system if all people would die as quickly as possible after they retire, because from then on they just cost money. And someone fighting cancer for years, taking all sorts of chemo and radiation therapy also cost society a lot of money.

This is probably not what you were thinking of in your argumentation, but I think it can be seen as a consistent extrapolation of what you argue and your arguments would similarly raise hackles against you as it would against anyone suggesting my above proposed extrapolation.

I still agree with you that it would be good if more people would get into a halfway decent shape, but you cannot force them to do so, even if it would be for their own good.

 

As long as they are healthy, who gives a flip?

 

We've had decades of education about the dangers of smoking, and while it has gone down, statistically, it is not eradicated. Nor will it ever be. YOu don't see any college classes being rammed down smokers' throats, or any "health" classes being rammed down the throats of people who drink too much.

I'm not saying that efforts shouldn't be made to address obesity. What I am saying is that those efforts should be done respectfully.

 

This college is about 30 minutes from my house. I think having this requirement on a specific population of students is asking for a lawsuit. Very poor implementation, in my opinion.

Personally, I think the US should adopt a mandatory 2 years military service right after high school. It would give people a little structure, teach them discipline, cover the physical/fitness angle and teach them how to use and handle firearms. One of my greatest regrets in life is not serving in the US military.

That'll never happen here though. I wouldn't mind seeing something like in the movie version of "Starship Troopers" - if you don't serve, you can't vote.

 

Yeah, it may be a smaller voting population, but I think turnout would rise to close to 100%.

 

I think the draft is a poor idea. Personally, I don't care much for military structure and discipline. I believe that while there are many fine and honorable people serving in the military, there are a lot of low-life losers as well. I'm not raising my kids to join the military just for the fun of it - to defend the country, yes, I would be agreeable to that. If they feel the need to be "fit" for whatever reason, they can join a gym. Nor do I give a flip about them learning anything about firearms. If they want to learn that stuff, that's fine and their choice. But I don't want this corrupt, corporate government telling my kids they need to spend time out of college and in its military.

 

Is it much different than saying people who failed basic Maths at high school have to take a catch up course? That's targeting those not numerically inclined.

 

Obviously Slovenia is different from Finland in that case. Alcoholism is a major problem, yes. I'm not sure how the deathcount compares to obesity but I imagine it's near the same levels. Alcohol is taxed (heavily) and regulated by a government monopoly and I've sat through tons of mandatory alcohol education during my years at school (granted not anymore at university level). Obesity is not controlled by anything. There is no "fat-tax" on unhealthy food and bad physical endurance certainly is not taxed and probably can't be taxed either, meaning that obesity and bad physical endurance is not regulated in any way except the physical education at schools, be it practical or theoretical.

I agree that the most effective way to work the problem would be that parents could raise their children in a proper way and teach them a healthy way of life with exercise and good diet. Society is, however, frequently forced to step in and try and fix all the damage bad parenting has caused. It's often ineffective, but it still has to be done.

 

If we were constantly on a war footing, like Starship Troopers, then I could see the value of military training. But like Chandos, I have no desire at all, whatsoever, to the smallest degree, to be subject to military discipline unless my country is at risk.

While I was in Japan, I met several other missionaries who had served in the military -- the one was much older than the average missionary (19-21) who, at 26, was a veteran of the first Gulf War. In any event, the boys to whom I am referring ran the gamut from a really fun and interesting guy to the biggest, most obnoxious douchebag I have ever met. Now we run across these sorts in regular life, but in the military such imbeciles are given excessive authority over others who have no way out of the situation. I would 10000% oppose being forced to be in that environment.

 

I actually think I have a very good example for this discussion. My brother is big. And I mean, BIG! At 14 he was 5'6" and 250 lbs. At 18, he had grown 2 more inches, still 250 lbs. He ate a good bit, but not that much more than the rest of us. He didn't exercise that much, but neither did the rest of us. In HS, he took up martial arts. In College, he added Aikido to it. In graduate school, he added Kendo. He's now teaching the Aikido and Kendo classes when his master is out. He's still 5'8" and, last I checked, about 190. He's lost weight, sure, but he's still just a big, big guy. Short bouncer kind of big. He's pretty poor, so he's eating less than ever, but knows enough about nutrition (and enjoys cooking enough) to still be eating healthy.

In short, the only things this guy could do to loose more weight would be starve himself and become a body builder (and that may not loose weight so much as fat). For him, it's just flat out genetics, and nothing (reasonable) he could do about it. Mind you, he's controlled it pretty effectively, so he's just this side of obese instead of morbidly obese, but he could never achieve a BMI of 24 and still be healthy. And yes, he's quite "famine resistant". And cold resistant. He'd do well in northern England.

 

I don't know what you talking about in this instance. As a parent, I spend most of my time undoing the damage done by society to my kids. Turn on the TV here and see all the "healthy" choices that my kids are presented with on a dialy basis - like Ronald McDonald. He even paid a visit to their classrooms in school 2 weeks ago. The first thing the kids said when they came home from school was, "Let's go to McDonald's." What a surprise that was.

Go into the grocery store and where are the candy bars when you are checking out? I'm 5'10. Are they at my height? Why no, they are set about 3 feet off the ground. Guess who is that height. They don't set them there for midgets.

But maybe it's different in your country.

 

Chandos, I think he is referring to the actions of uneducated parents, or really stupid parents, or (and I know I'm gonna get flack for this one) teenage parents who are often single. Many of these people make terrible nutritional choices for their kids because they either don't know any better or they don't trust "the establishment" when it tells them stuff like this. For those who fall into the latter category, there's not much society can do without trampling on their rights.

But waiting until the child is in college, having suffered through all the "fatty, fatty two-by-four" taunts of their peers for several years, and then subjecting them to more humiliation, well, that's just going to turn them off the whole thing even more. A more delicate, respectful hand is needed.

 

LKD - OK, I see your point. That delicate hand should be the family doctor. Doctors can spot these kinds of problems early and give the best advice - personal, well-explained advice that young parents can use. But again, that gets back to the health care debate. A lot of young parents can't afford the cost of care. One of the points at the center of the debate, is that if you don't care enough about your fellow citizens to provide basic services, then at least consider that somewhere down the path of poor health care services society will end up paying more for it anyway. When will people learn?

 

There's also an socioeconomic aspect. Since unhealthy food is cheaper than the healthier choice, a single teenage parent might not have much choice to begin with. Combined with lacking nutritional knowledge and the constant advertising (like that Ronald McDonald example) you'll have a problem.

Taxing unhealthy food would be a very reasonable solution, but I doubt it will ever happen. That would make Ronald sad.

@ NOG: A guy who's 5'8 & 190 pounds can't be THAT big

 

Using your lack of proof to support an argument is an approach I don't see very often. Unsurprising, given it doesn't work.

Except that they just reintroduced the "candy tax", and you will get obesity-related information force-fed to you by doctors even if there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.

*sigh* All hail the master of the One True Way. May we all follow his lead and be exactly alike; and may we judge and scorn those who are not exactly as we all are. All hail!

 

To be honest I'm not sure if I should even bother responding to you since you apparently have no interest in respectful debate without the excess hostility, but here I go anyhow.

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_determinants/life_style/alcohol/documents/alcohol_factsheet_en.pdf

There you go. Approximately equal as I had guessed. Note that combining bad physical fitness and obesity you roughly reach the levels of tobacco becoming de facto the greatest causers of premature death in Europe.

The candy tax is a good start but there's more to being out of shape and obese than candy, soda and icecream. The tax will be quite marginal compared to the alcohol or tobacco tax if they go with the same rates as the old candy tax which was repealed some years ago because of conflicts with EU legislation.

I won't even bother with the last statement.

EDIT: Physical shape being so low is quite surprising since I read an article by a medical researcher that bad physical shape would actually be more dangerous. I suppose many of the factors listed in those statistics more or less intertwine making it somewhat difficult to differentiate accurately when death is caused by high blood pressure, obesity, bad physical shape, tobacco or alcohol.

EDIT2: After a second check combining physical inactivity and obesity takes them to second place after tobacco, my bad.

 

I am sure this Thanksgiving won't help the issue at all.