Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

[Jembru]

Firstly, I realise even the title of this is biased/leading, but I couldn't think of a more neutral way of wording it. Sorry about this.

This debate was started in Anunituo's 'just yapping' thread, but I thought it would be more appropriate to bring it over to debates. There aren't many things I have strong opinions on (notice my general absense from most debate topics), but this something that really concerns me and I can get quite animated about it.

It was triggered by this link... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6E5pfJEROA

Here's the conversation so far.

It actually scares me to think this is a genuine place! How can they legally get away with selling meals containing 8,000 calories? They really do let people dine for free if they are over 350lb too. If this were a business promoting anorexia or bulemia, there would be outrage, so why is this considered okay? It's something I feel pretty strongly about.. I know people have free will, but I sometimes wonder if people shouldn't be sectioned if their weight gets to a certain point. Instead, they're given benefit, allowed to get to a size where they require several home help carers, and are left to eat themselves to death. Anorexics can be sectioned and force fed, so why not force diets for extremely obese people?

Here is thing,what if you are a vegetarian,and someone decides this is an unhealthy way to eat. They force you to eat meat "For your own good"...You see where this is going,who decides how much control will be allowed in your personal decisions about your life.

Now here is an example of just how wrong this can,and did get. Up until about 1960-65 being Gay was considered a mental problem,and back then you could be forced into a mental institution against your will. I had a gay friend who as a youngster did have this done by his parents to him. He underwent electro-shock and many other things,but it did not change his orientation,what it did do was make him hate his parents. This is why is is a bad policy to allow any government to decide these personal issues.

A little history.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.html

I was a little off in my dates,it was 1973 that it was changed.

"In 1973, the weight of empirical data, coupled with changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Some psychiatrists who fiercely opposed their action subsequently circulated a petition calling for a vote on the issue by the Association's membership. That vote was held in 1974, and the Board's decision was ratified."

(I had only seen the first paragraph of this when I wrote my reply as the gay stuff was added later. However, I don't consider homosexuality a disorder any more than I consider vegetarianism a disorder, so my reply below applies to both examples...)

I see the point, but being a vegetarian isn't going to kill me. If it were dangerous for me to continue on my current diet, of course I would change it. I used to smoke and I was forced to stop that! Okay, only in certain places, but as a smoker, it felt like a massive violation of rights to be told I had to smoke outside, in the cold, with drunken strangers. Overeating isn't a lifestyle choice, it is an addiction, a disorder and/or a mental health problem. Very few obese people will tell you they are fat through choice and are proud of how much they eat. There ARE groups like 'Beauty at All Sizes', and while I applaud the message that we needn't all be stick thin to be beautiful, I am against the message 'it's okay to be obese'. It is NOT okay, any more than it is okay to smoke or binge drink. Promoting bad eating habits like this is just sick.

I wonder if we should maybe start a debate topic on this? What do you think? I'm happy for you to copy my comments over if you're up for that!

This is the problem,some people,I have heard myself say that they think being Veg is bad for your health,and if they have control to force you just because it is their belief,they would use that force. It could be a debate if everyone will follow the no flaming or angry out bursts. It is a problem in regards just who is making the rules,to have literature,or a place to go for help is one thing,to MAKE someone go against their will is quite another matter.

And another question: Would you want a controlling religious body to tell you that your beliefs were bad,and against their "Dogma" and they had enough control to pass laws against your beliefs,as in China against Falun Gong. This is why Santorum bothers me so much with his religious government views.

I am not sure if you realise I am not talking about everyone who is overweight or obese. I am talking here about dangerously obese people who can no longer walk unaided and WILL die if they keep on eating as they are. It's a horrible, gradual death too, often with the loss of limbs and the need for other invasive proceedures. All dignity is lost as teams of carers wipe the sh*t off their backs and scrub their fat flabs daily. I am not suggesting we stop people from doing other things that endager their lives. Even having successfully quit smoking, I am against a complete ban. However, if someone behaves in a way that is directly endagering their lives, they can and often are, sectioned against their will, in an attempt to treat them and prevent their death.

To me, I don't see how the example of a religion dictating what we do, compares. They are not basing their beliefs on known medical fact, so it's kinda different isn't it?

By the same token, do you also think it is wrong to force a woman in her early 20s, to eat, if she weighs just 5st due to severe anorexia and has been hospitalised for her illness? Does she also have the right to refuse food and let herself die? If so.. why can't people with terminal illness also choose death? Why it is illegal to allow some people with a death wish to die, and yet other people don't have the right to choose when their suffering ends? (I see that I might be wandering into a seperate debate here, so feel free to guide me back on track).

Please correct me if I am wrong about this, but don't people usually have the right to refuse treatment, even if sectioned? Even so, at least an attempt has been made to save them instead of just leaving them to die.

[anunitu]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

My point isn't actually about Obese people,it is more about where this may lead in the big picture.
My Mother in law was(she has passed away several years ago) a VERY religious Christian,and it surprised me greatly when she said to me and I quote "You can not allow a Pron(so as not to have a bot catch this) theater to be closed,because,that might lead to closing a Church" She understood the basic premise of a free society. The powers that be should not engage in controlling personal behavior. This is the root of our freedoms,even if we do not like or agree with another's lifestyle or even manner of dress. I understand the concern for another's health,or lifestyle choices,but then why do we allow so many people to remain homeless,a definite threat to their health. It is a fine line we must walk here, and it does have dark outcomes at times. And that in both not interfering and interfering too much. While it is true we may be our brother keepers,they are not ours to control. We do have an obligation to our Children,because we are responsible for their welfare as their parents. One must grasp that fine line between helping,and controlling.

---------- Post added at 12:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:25 AM ----------

I believe one can help someone,without trying to force them to do as you want. One can be encouraging about their battle with weight,but if you badger and try to force behavior,it may in fact have the opposite effect,where they indulge even more just to show you that you don't control them.

[Ophidia]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

Fat doesn't equal poor health. Poor health equals poor health. A poor diet or poor lifestyle choices, no matter how many or how few calories one consumes, is going to lead to poor health. Then again, maybe it won't. You may not be genetically predisposed to nutritional disorders. You may be vegan & have a congenital heart defect. Being sick shouldn't be illegal, and if they're going to make 'eating oneself to death' a crime, they need to criminalize cigarettes, alcohol, artificial sweeteners, NSAIDS, and every other substance on the planet that could potentially cause health problems for any living things. Seems kind of ridiculous, don't it?

Here's a story that's been in the news recently about a 17 year old girl who is at a normal weight for her age, but eats nothing but chicken nuggets from McDonald's: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ets-age-2.html

Compare her to Ragen Chastain, a 'morbidly obese' dancer: http://danceswithfat.wordpress.com/

Who's healthier?

[shadow1982]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

I used to smoke and I was forced to stop that! Okay, only in certain places, but as a smoker, it felt like a massive violation of rights to be told I had to smoke outside, in the cold, with drunken strangers.

Whilst I do understand the point you are trying to make here I think your analogy is flawed. Smoking has been banned in certain places to protect the health and rights of non-smokers, not the person smoking. Passive smoking can have a detrimental affect on your health, sitting next to someone who eats 8000+ calories a day is going to have no affect on you what so ever. I am a smoker to but I don't believe my rights to smoke where I please out ways the rights of those who do not want to be affected by my choice.

According to the BMI measurement I am classed as obese. I wear a (uk) size 16-18 and have a BMI of 31. I am also pretty active and have no weight related health problems. So where do you draw the line? Should I be sectioned now in case I get any bigger, or am I ok for now but I better watch I don't put on more weight? And who gets to make that decision; me, a doctor, my parents? As a 29 year old woman who runs my own home I believe I have the right to make my own decisions regarding my lifestyle, and that includes what I choose to eat.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

I don't see how regulating the amount of calories in a meal or dish is any different than regulating the percentage of alcohol allowed in a kind of alcohol or the amount of shots in a cocktail, which lots of places do all the time. That's not to say that you can regulate calories at home, but you can ban having meals of say, more than x amount of calories in restaurants in the name of public health. If someone wanted to order 10 meals, that would be their choice, much as people could order 10 drinks if they wanted. But at least the amount of calories per meal could be reduced to avoid over-consumption in the name of public health.

---------- Post added at 09:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:05 PM ----------

[/COLOR]

Whilst I do understand the point you are trying to make here I think your analogy is flawed. Smoking has been banned in certain places to protect the health and rights of non-smokers, not the person smoking. Passive smoking can have a detrimental affect on your health, sitting next to someone who eats 8000+ calories a day is going to have no affect on you what so ever. I am a smoker to but I don't believe my rights to smoke where I please out ways the rights of those who do not want to be affected by my choice.

I wish more people here felt as you do. We don't have a full smoking ban in public and even the one we DO have isn't enforced at all, so you can just smoke anywhere and it's up to bars to decide if they have smoking or not....and only a handful do (and most of them are touristy hell holes with awful, overpriced drinks). I hate the 'I should be able to choose to smoke wherever I want' argument because it's so effing selfish. OTHER PEOPLE have to breathe YOUR smoke. It's nothing like eating fatty food or drinking alcohol...you're not forcing either down anyone's throats. When you smoke, you force other people to breathe your smoke.

Lots of people have asthma, or allergies. All we want is to socialise like normal people and go out with friends, but we can't. I have to miss out on social stuff ALL THE TIME because I can't be in an enclosed space with smoking. So I spend a lot of time at home, alone. How fair is that? If there's a smoking ban, you CAN STILL SMOKE, you just have to do it outside. Everyone wins. No one has to not smoke, and no one has to sit at home while their friends are out because they can't go to bars because of smoking.

[Jembru]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

Fat doesn't equal poor health. Poor health equals poor health. A poor diet or poor lifestyle choices, no matter how many or how few calories one consumes, is going to lead to poor health. Then again, maybe it won't. You may not be genetically predisposed to nutritional disorders. You may be vegan & have a congenital heart defect. Being sick shouldn't be illegal, and if they're going to make 'eating oneself to death' a crime, they need to criminalize cigarettes, alcohol, artificial sweeteners, NSAIDS, and every other substance on the planet that could potentially cause health problems for any living things. Seems kind of ridiculous, don't it?

Here's a story that's been in the news recently about a 17 year old girl who is at a normal weight for her age, but eats nothing but chicken nuggets from McDonald's: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ets-age-2.html

Compare her to Ragen Chastain, a 'morbidly obese' dancer: http://danceswithfat.wordpress.com/

Who's healthier?

I'm not qualified to answer which of these is healthier, but based only on what the media and literature have led me to believe, I would say these are both examples of people who are currently getting away with risky lifestyle choices. I've known people live until their late 80s, despite being overweight and smoking 40 cigarettes a day, I have also heard of people who eat well and exercise often, suddenly drop dead in their 30s. Exceptions to rules do not mean we can ignore health warnings.

I do agree though, that being overweight does not equal poor health. My issue here is not with 'fat' people, it is with people who are so overweight that they are unable to work and need to use a wheelchair to get around.. or worse, actually cannot get out of bed. That DOES equal poor health and it would take a large amount of denial not to see that.

Maybe I should explain where this has come from. This is extremely hard for me to admit to, so please don't judge me too unkindly, I already feel bad enough, trust me. I have an extreme obsession with my weight. I am seeking help with, but I don't trust health professionals to take me seriously, so I am mainly trying to treat myself. It is only myself I judge harshly though. Other people, no matter their weight, always seem to look so much better than I do. One of the consequences of my dysmorphia is that I obsessively watch a lot of TV shows about diets and weight loss. I enjoy watching how people manage to overcome eating disorders, be it overeating or undereating. There is one show called 'Supersize vs Superskinny', that usually has a part where they introduce the supersize person to people living in the States, who are at the stage where they WILL die as a result of their extreme weight. It is so heartbreaking when you hear their stories and see them cry.. because they are so scared of what they can no longer prevent: their approaching death. The show shows you how many people it takes just to take these people into hospital.. and the specialist equiptment such as adapted ambulances that's needed. They also point out the massive financial cost of care, and the cost of just one hospital appointment for these people. At the end of the show, more often than not, there will be some text comes up that ways 'Sadly, just 6 weeks after filming, ***** passed away'. All I can think of is how scared this person had been of this death, and the life they could have had, had they only been supported with this eating disorder. This frequently moves me to tears (I am very sensitive) and it just makes me wish there was a way to prevent this from ever happening. I admit my method is extreme, but what else is there?

DanieMarie probably has the best solution so far to be honest; to have restrictions on how many calories food can contain. As she says, people would be free to buy multiple courses, but a lot of people simply don't realise how many calories are in their food, and are overeating by accident. This would surely help at least some people.

I saw this recently when I was talking to my mum. She asked me why I only have one slice of pizza when I go to pizza hut with my boyfriend (he eats the rest), considering we save up for these 'treats' out of our tiny budgets and make a bit thing of going out together. I explained that just one slice contains at the very least, 270 calories. With salad, wine and dessert, this is more than ample for one meal! My mum admitted to being shocked at these values.. when she goes, she eats an entire 11" stuffed crust pizza to herself (and yes, she struggles to control her weight) and with dessert too, this is already pushing the daily guideline of 2,000 calories, in a single meal (and we're both only 5' tall, so require less than this anyway).

These was an experiment on a show called '10 things you should know about losing weight', where a woman who ate a very healthy diet and exercised daily, but was obese, was investigated. She used the 'low metabolism' excuse but when her metabolism was tested, she was in the normal range. They then made her keep a food diary, but they also made her drink marked water that would allow them to test her urine for EXACTLY how many calories she ate. When they compared her diary with her urine samples, she was underestimating her calorie consumption by over 40% Controlling how many calories food can legally contain, would surely help people like this lady?

Whilst I do understand the point you are trying to make here I think your analogy is flawed. Smoking has been banned in certain places to protect the health and rights of non-smokers, not the person smoking. Passive smoking can have a detrimental affect on your health, sitting next to someone who eats 8000+ calories a day is going to have no affect on you what so ever. I am a smoker to but I don't believe my rights to smoke where I please out ways the rights of those who do not want to be affected by my choice.

According to the BMI measurement I am classed as obese. I wear a (uk) size 16-18 and have a BMI of 31. I am also pretty active and have no weight related health problems. So where do you draw the line? Should I be sectioned now in case I get any bigger, or am I ok for now but I better watch I don't put on more weight? And who gets to make that decision; me, a doctor, my parents? As a 29 year old woman who runs my own home I believe I have the right to make my own decisions regarding my lifestyle, and that includes what I choose to eat.

Yeah, I think I had already said I know it's different but it was just an example (did I?). I never liked smoking around nonsmokers and didn't really mind the ban (although I do think the way it was done was wrong.. I hate seeing elderly men and woman being forced into the freezing cold to smoke. That's another matter though).

As for your BMI, I actually disagree with the goverment guidlines on what counts as obese. I think it needs to be higher and as it stands, it is probably causing more harm than good, especially to people's self-esteem. My 11 year old niece is on the school cross country team and trains a lot for it. She was an early developer (complete opposite to me), so already has her woman curves yet this wasn't even taken into account when a letter was sent home to her mother saying she is clinically obese and the school is concerned. At best, I'd say she is a little on the chubby side, but obese is unfair and it has ruined her confidence. The last thing I want is for her to end hating herself the way I do.

A UK size 16 is average right? So how on earth could this be considered obese?

I realise there would never be a way to genuinely force these extremely obese individuals to get well again, and to be honest, I am basing my understanding of force feeding anorexics, on something which happened to a teenager, who was legally under the care of her parents, and people with learning disabilities I have worked with, who are considered unable to make an informed choice. Google didn't shine any light on where the law stands on this, so I suppose it might be the case that eating or not eating, we're always going to be allowed to slowly kill ourselves. It's heartbreaking.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

I really don't get the idea that society has the right to start imposing a healthy lifestyle on other people. And the reason I don't get it is because I'm not convinced they know what a healthy lifestyle is. Mr Penry's grandfather drank nothing but cider until he was twelve (the local well water wasn't safe to drink) and smoked like a trooper all his life. He also spent about fifty years down the coal mines. He lived to be almost a hundred and was never ill. Yet he had a very 'unhealthy' lifestyle. There are many of these curious analogies and I do understand how frustrating it is when we see someone else doing something we think is dangerous and will lead to an early death.

Therefore I propose banning all motor vehicles. That way nobody will get run over. And it will save lots and lots of lives. Of course society will have to change drastically, and some people will die because ambulances and fire engines will be horse drawn once more...but that's the price to pay.

Likewise why not ban all wars? That would be another good place to start. We could stop interfering in other countries' affairs and just leave them get on with things... only of course there are drawbacks there, too.

In my own, admittedly biased, opinion, the people who are putting themselves most at risk are those attempting to tell me how to live my life. Just let me get on with it. After all, none of us are getting out of here alive....

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

In my own, admittedly biased, opinion, the people who are putting themselves most at risk are those attempting to tell me how to live my life. Just let me get on with it. After all, none of us are getting out of here alive....

Amen to that.

I suggest that we make it a practice not to "fix" other people's lives unless they ask for help. They may not consider themselves to be broken, and most likely resent the intrusion into their private affairs.

There's a fairly fine line dividing being helpful from sticking one's nose where it doesn't belong.

[Ophidia]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

DanieMarie probably has the best solution so far to be honest; to have restrictions on how many calories food can contain. As she says, people would be free to buy multiple courses, but a lot of people simply don't realise how many calories are in their food, and are overeating by accident. This would surely help at least some people.

These was an experiment on a show called '10 things you should know about losing weight', where a woman who ate a very healthy diet and exercised daily, but was obese, was investigated. She used the 'low metabolism' excuse but when her metabolism was tested, she was in the normal range. They then made her keep a food diary, but they also made her drink marked water that would allow them to test her urine for EXACTLY how many calories she ate. When they compared her diary with her urine samples, she was underestimating her calorie consumption by over 40% Controlling how many calories food can legally contain, would surely help people like this lady?

Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn't. There's really no way to judge what will make a fat person lose weight, just like you can't predict why some junk-food-junkies stay skinny.

I actually did something similar to that experiment, based around my A1C counts. My doctor determined that I wasn't eating enough calories (and I was only eating once a day) which was putting me into starvation-mode. So I tried 'eating less more often', and while it did help stop my sporadic hypoglycemic incidents, I didn't lose any weight. I'm fat because I don't exercise. I frikkin' hate exercise. It bores me to tears. I don't like to walk unless I have a specific goal, and most of the time when we have nice enough weather for me to go 'hiking' I am at work. On an average night at work, just doing my deliveries at the casino, I manage about 2 miles of walking, including climbing seven flights of stairs when the elevators are down... I fast regularly, cook at home, all that blahdey-blah... but I'm still fat. If I had my way, I'd have a bunch of guys carrying me around on a palanquin. I'm laaaazzzzyyy, and I don't want the Fat Police to come to my house and make me move around more. And if the Fat Police had to legally make people eat healthy or exercise to lose weight, they couldn't just target overweight people & get away with it. They'd also have to target couch potatoes and junk food junkies - just like they have to target everyone when it comes to drug abuse.

If there was a tried-and-true, end-all-be-all 'formula' for an across-the-board 'healthy' weight, it might be more plausible to try to mandate some kind of lifestyle for everyone - but there's not. And like Tylluan says, we all gotta go sometime - so until my time comes around, I'm going to prefer doing things I enjoy (not moving much) instead of forcing myself into activities I loathe just to eke an extra 5 minutes into the rest of my unpredictable lifespan. And chances are, I'm not the only person who feels that way about themselves.

[Caelia]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

I've been hesitant about responding to this thread, but I think I'll give it a go.

Many long-time members will remember when I was a dance major. I literally had 18-24 hours a week of physical activity. I love moving. However, at that time I loved food as much and felt pressure from my family to be a certain weight. I was technically a healthy weight at 135, but my lifestyle wasn't. I was bulimic.

I apparently hid it so well my roommate wasn't even aware. I'd restrict myself to a 1200 calorie diet and if I went over even once I'd schedule a time to use laxatives. Yes, I've since quit that stuff because I realized what I was doing to myself and how I made myself a slave to--for me--an unattainable image. My ideal bodyweight was 120-125, but would settle for 130.

My point with bringing all of this up? There is no superficial way to determine who gets to eat and what. Not once in this debate save perzephone has anyone mentioned how physical activity, allergies, etc. will factor into the subjugation of the fat police. I was a healthy weight, but I wasn't living a healthy lifestyle and those around me were oblivious. Yes, there are obvious limitations, but not always the case.

Here's another example. A former friend of mine was incredibly obese. I didn't believe her until she showed me pictures. She dieted, she exercised (and continues to do so) and never had lasting weight loss. What finally did it was discovering her allergy to lactose. Once she eliminated that from her diet the weight came off.

It came up as a common issue with my research into "fat tax". For overweight people dieting and exercise are OK. For obese people there are other factors that need to be examined including, but not limited to, psychological problems. Calorie restriction and exercise aren't going to completely abate depression or an eating disorder.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

Yeah I do totally agree with that. I actually -don't- agree with a 'fat tax' for that reason, because I don't think it would effectively solve any problems.

Some other notes:
-I think mental health is something that's still not nearly supported enough in any of our societies. It's not widely covered by health care even in countries with public health care (in fact, over here you're -more- likely to get coverage with private insurance than public and in Canada it's only ever covered by extended health insurance). While a lot of governments assume it's only worth covering dire cases where people are a danger to themselves, even relatively mild depression (or other mental health problems) can cause a lot of problem and have big consequences...and big consequences on society if lots of people are left unchecked.
-While all developed countries are having rising levels of obesity, I also think the US case is especially bad because of the uneven access to health care.
-The reason I support limiting certain foods to having a certain amount of calories is because a lot of people really -don't- know how much they're consuming. I think that's especially true over here where a lot of said foods aren't traditional in certain areas. People in Italy and Spain traditionally eat a buttload of olive oil and cheese and stuff but they know what they're getting into and traditional diets account for that. When they start incorporating cheeseburgers in their diet you don't get the same amount of calories in the same amount of food. Even cheeseburgers and pasta can vary like crazy. There's a big chain in the UK called Pret-A-Manger that has this pasta dish with cream sauce, and it has an obscene amount of calories in it. When everyone I knew found out, they were sooo shocked and kind of horrified because they were eating it all the time thinking it was sort of indulgent but not as bad as fast food...they were wrong. It's sort of like alcohol (as I said before)...back home, as well as a lot of other places, alcohol strength is largely regulated (except for certain kinds of specialty alcohol, which isn't available in restaurants and must be very clearly labelled), and in bars and restaurants this is especially true. Mixed drinks are also only allowed to be a certain strength (I think you're not allowed to put in more than 3 shots, even if it's a 'fishbowl' drink or something like that). The reason for this isn't that they want people to not drink, but they want people to know their limits and be able to gage how much alcohol they're drinking. And it's totally true...we don't have that in Berlin and sometimes it's SO EASY to get drunk because they can make you a mixed drink that's ridiculously strong, but you're not really aware of it. You have a couple of martini-type cocktails and feel drunk after 2 at one place, but totally fine at another, and they can taste exactly the same. I think food can be similarly deceiving.

[Caelia]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

I agree that mental health is ignored or seen as some "luxury" treatment. It's one of the reasons I've been against US health care reforms; it ignores mental health and its physical effects. I also agree it's difficult to figure out much one intakes on anything when eating/drinking/ etc out (I still when eating out portion my food and take home the rest for other meals unless I'm that hungry). However I do feel in that regard some personal accountability comes in. Like I said earlier I am aware when eating out I'm getting huge portions. I bear that in mind and divide my plate into proper portion sizes and take the rest home. Part of that is I try to be mindful of my health since it's taken a beating. Other people like my father just don't care about their health despite the obvious turn (two doctors have said he's had a minor heart attack and needs further testing).

[DanieMarie]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

Totally...and I'm not saying it should be allowed to control how much a person eats. If they want to regulate calories in certain foods, dishes, etc, or portion sizes (or both, though I think the former is more important because even small sizes can be deceiving) there's NOTHING that says that you can't order multiple portions. That's up to personal discretion. If you want to eat more, no one should be able to stop you. Just like drink strength might be regulated back home, but you can still have 10 drinks if you want. I just think it should be easier to tell how many calories you're eating and harder to unintentionally eat a high amount.

[Caelia]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

That's the whole point of this debate, though. Basically we are delegating only certain people get to eat multiple portions and others don't. Also the standards of how we determine obese is questionable and very fluid. By 1960 standards I would be considered morbidly obese. By BMI standards I am considered overweight still despite my muscle mass, and if you saw the rant thread I'm about the same weight and height as FantasyWitch, who is appears to be a healthy weight. Does that mean my caloric intake should be monitored and regulated by those standards?

I agree morbidly obese people need some help. I disagree that cutting them from a 3600 calorie diet to suddenly a 1600 has any efficacy (not to mention adds more weight in the long run due to the brain going into starvation mode) especially so without something to replace those cravings. At least recovering heroin addicts get methadone to ameliorate their problems.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Is it right that dangerously obese people are allowed to eat themselves to death?

Yeah I understand what you're debating and said that I don't think people should be forced to cut down their intake. I just posed that as an alternative, not even so much because it would help people who are already obese reduce the amount of calories they eat, but also because it would help reduce the problem of obesity in the first place. Would there still be obese people? Yes, just like people still get drunk in BC. Would it be easier to know what you're eating and harder to consume extra calories by accident? Yes, just like you have a relatively good idea how 2 drinks will affect you in BC (as opposed to here in Berlin where you really have no idea).