Anonymous wrote:Apparently the average american woman now has a 37.5 inche waist, up 2 inches, and now wears a 16 to 18. I find this really surprising, and a bit sad. Since the average American woman is also 5'4", that can't be good.


https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17543266.2016.1214291?journalCode=tfdt20

So, at 5'7, size 6 with a 27 inch waist, I'm a skinny Minnie?!

Anonymous wrote:Why does it make you sad? Unpack that.

Not OP but I find it sad too. It is gross that people have let themselves get like this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the average american woman now has a 37.5 inche waist, up 2 inches, and now wears a 16 to 18. I find this really surprising, and a bit sad. Since the average American woman is also 5'4", that can't be good.


https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17543266.2016.1214291?journalCode=tfdt20

Your link was published in 2016. Trying to rev up site views for ad revenue, eh?

And the survey ended in 2010. It must be worse now. So sad for our country, the future of healthcare and our military.

Socialized medicine will bring about positive peer pressure for people to stop smoking and live healthier lives.... in addition to other things, like lower Healthcare costs on a national basis.

I don't understand people who believe this.

While our healthcare isn't socialized, our insurance is socialized. The premiums you pay don't go into a fund that your insurance company holds until you need a service covered. No, everyone's premiums are pooled together and used to pay for the care of all others. Your premiums that you pay now are already being used for cancer treatments for a lifelong smoker or type 2 diabetes management for someone who is obese. There's no positive peer pressure now for people to live healthier lives. I don't see it happening if we ever get universal healthcare.

I was very shocked to learn that many people don't really understand how insurance works. I've talked to lots of people who either didn't realize or connect the dots that their premiums are already covering the healthcare needs of others. That's why there's a whole host of "elective" procedures that insurance won't cover (or fight to cover) - if they covered it for one person, everyone would want that procedure, and then the insurance of course wouldn't make as much $$.

What is different with universal healthcare is the government regulation. Them saying insulin cannot be sold for more than $25/vial. Or the cost of 2 Tylenol is $1.50/tablet. Big insurance doesn't want this because then there's price equality and less profit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

It is, which is why we support socialized medicine.

I think conservatives/libertarians are against socialized medicine for just this reason. People are eating junk and don't care at all about their health, why should others have to pay for it? Medicine would cost a lot less and would be more supported if people were generally healthier.

Preventative medicine would go a long way.

I know conservatives/libertarians think every issue someone encounters in life is because of their own moral failing, but that just isn’t so.

I agree that this doesn't apply to everyone who is overweight, but there has to be a systemic issue at play here given how much the nation as a whole is increasing in BMI, moreso than other developed countries (who also have this issue, but not nearly the rate the US does).

Right. If anyone is worried about this as a societal/systemic problem, let's hear some ideas for societal/systemic changes that will support healthier lifestyles.

Compare the Sidwell lunch menu to your local public and you have your answer. Add in food deserts, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

It is, which is why we support socialized medicine.

I think conservatives/libertarians are against socialized medicine for just this reason. People are eating junk and don't care at all about their health, why should others have to pay for it? Medicine would cost a lot less and would be more supported if people were generally healthier.

Preventative medicine would go a long way.

I know conservatives/libertarians think every issue someone encounters in life is because of their own moral failing, but that just isn’t so.

I agree that this doesn't apply to everyone who is overweight, but there has to be a systemic issue at play here given how much the nation as a whole is increasing in BMI, moreso than other developed countries (who also have this issue, but not nearly the rate the US does).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

It is, which is why we support socialized medicine.

I think conservatives/libertarians are against socialized medicine for just this reason. People are eating junk and don't care at all about their health, why should others have to pay for it? Medicine would cost a lot less and would be more supported if people were generally healthier.

Preventative medicine would go a long way.

I know conservatives/libertarians think every issue someone encounters in life is because of their own moral failing, but that just isn’t so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

It is, which is why we support socialized medicine.

I think conservatives/libertarians are against socialized medicine for just this reason. People are eating junk and don't care at all about their health, why should others have to pay for it? Medicine would cost a lot less and would be more supported if people were generally healthier.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

I find it strange too. The food companies are making billions off peddling their junk, the medical system reaps profits from the obese and out of shape, and who suffers? The poor and working folk of America. Yet no one ever suggests to just eat less and stop buying crap.

How would that work, though? That would come across as incredibly judgmental.

Yes it would--which is exactly what happens in many countries. Have you ever lived in a country where they do judge you for being over the norms there? I know people think the US fat shames, but they don't hold a candle to most of Asia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

I find it strange too. The food companies are making billions off peddling their junk, the medical system reaps profits from the obese and out of shape, and who suffers? The poor and working folk of America. Yet no one ever suggests to just eat less and stop buying crap.

Yeah, because of companies like Tyson lobbying. School lunches are sh*t because the federal reimbursement rate is so low that schools don’t have kitchens, they just heat and store.

Anonymous wrote:Why does it make you sad? Unpack that.

Because generally speaking being clinically obese is neither good for the person, nor is it good for the healthcare system. Is that hard to figure out? I doubt American me fare much better, but you are free to go look that up too.

And we are still not allowed to talk to children about moderating their food intake according to DCUM harpies because we might cause then to be disordered about food. Eye roll. Seems to me what we are doing isn’t working either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

I find it strange too. The food companies are making billions off peddling their junk, the medical system reaps profits from the obese and out of shape, and who suffers? The poor and working folk of America. Yet no one ever suggests to just eat less and stop buying crap.

How would that work, though? That would come across as incredibly judgmental.

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

I find it strange too. The food companies are making billions off peddling their junk, the medical system reaps profits from the obese and out of shape, and who suffers? The poor and working folk of America. Yet no one ever suggests to just eat less and stop buying crap.

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised this isn't more of an issue with liberals. Just imagine how much less food we'd need to produce if Americans ate less/ate normal portions. Less greenhouse gases, less carbon, less trucking food around.

It is, which is why we support socialized medicine.