Michael Moore - brilliant and uplifting

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
dazzlingamy said:
I'm not going to feel apologetic that i cried at some people who have been fucked over by a government that preaches one thing and does another.

I'm certainly not taking you to task on being compassionate and angry over all of this. I just think you should know we're not all just sitting around not caring. People ARE trying to change things.
 
yes, thats true, i know people are trying to make a difference, and i guess its ust frustrating, because it seems like sometimes its just futile. I know not everyone is sitting back, and i don't blame the ordinary citizen for the prediciment they have landed themselves in, its just disgust to see people, people with wives and kids and parents be so lying and despiciable and uncaring with other peoples lives and health for a couple more dollars in their pocket and another car in the garage. It makes you lose a bit of hope that people are really intrusically good.
 
ntalwar said:


Although in some societies being overweight is a sign of status, that's not the case in the US.


I don't want do demonize anyone,
but having just had a birthday I became the oldest member of my family at age 50, all my aunts, uncles, both parents, and all grand parents and even older siblings had all died.

I think the choices we make are important, for our life span and the quality of our lives.

It is more acceptable to speak out against, someone that smokes 3 packs a day or consumes multiple six packs of beer a day than it is to speak to obesity issues.


again, I don't want to demonize anyone

but I wonder if this woman did more harm for others and herself than good.

ba_desserts04_c_26se.jpg


Bettye Travis -- fought to gain more respect for fat population

Steve Rubenstein, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, May 29, 2007


Bettye Travis, a nationally known advocate to end discrimination against fat people and a woman who often proclaimed that "being fat is fabulous,'' has died.

Ms. Travis, 55, of Berkeley, died May 7 in an Oakland hospital of complications from cancer.

"We were all taught to be ashamed of being fat, but we aren't buying that anymore," said Ms. Travis, the former president of the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance. "No matter what your size, you deserve respect. Being fat is not a crime."

In the line of duty, she battled radio shock jocks, led workshops, counseled members and fought prejudice with good humor -- once, when fellow visitors at Disneyland were pointing at and photographing her, she smiled and grabbed her own camera and began snapping pictures of the people who were snapping pictures of her, until they got the message.

Ms. Travis was a native of Cheyenne, Wyo., and a graduate of Monmouth College in Illinois. She came to Berkeley in 1978 and received a master's degree from JFK University in Orinda. She was a founder and proprietor of Spun Sugar, a Berkeley store and school for candy makers and bakers.

Like fellow members of the association that she headed in the 1990s, she called herself "fat" with pride.

"It's what we are, and we're proud of it,'' she said.

She was the former client services director for the AIDS Project of the East Bay and a longtime activist in the civil rights and anti-war movements. She enjoyed collecting snow globes and toy moose, attending San Francisco Giants games and reading mysteries set in the Scottish moors.

Surviving are her partner of 17 years, Linda Moreno, and her daughters, Bianca and Cinaida Moreno-Travis, all of Berkeley.

A memorial gathering will be held at 5 p.m. Saturday at the Salvation Army Church, 4600 Appian Way, El Sobrante.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it makes much sense to link our obesity stats with whatever attitudes supposedly explain our lack of a comprehensive publically funded health system--indifference to the welfare of others; diehard ideological commitments to what's supposedly most economically 'efficient'; insufficient understanding of how the sytem we already have works, which is necessary for recognizing which reforms represent solid steps toward a more equitable distibution of coverage; and so on. Those things do not cause obesity (which, by the way, is far more common among the poor in the US--does that mean they're more "greedy"?). It's a given that even if we were to ultimately wind up with socialized medicine precisely on the UK/Canada model (unlikely, I think), that that would not take the form of a one-fell-swoop, instant radical overhaul; it would have to happen in phases, a phased approach requires consensus as to which reforms are most viable and should take highest priority, and such consensus in turn requires more knowledge of how the economics of healthcare work than most Americans realistically have.

I don't have anything like anitram's knowledge of healthcare economics, but my general impression is that most of the publically funded healthcare systems in place in the various (non-US) Western countries date to around WWII, and I'd imagine that that historical context--in terms of which medical "systems" previously existed and how radical the departure from them was--isn't all that analogous to what we have in the US now...medicine has become much more industrialized; a thicket of large and powerful corporations (insurance, pharmaceuticals) have long sense intertwined themselves with our system; the various interests involved have access to much more sophisticated means of promoting their own agenda, and so on. Emotionally driven reactions about how heartless and stupid our system is, or falling back on personal anecdotes about 'Well I had to have blah blah blah done last year, and I got it on time, and I didn't have to pay a thing!' are understandable, but they don't do anything to address what the actual political process that needs to be undertaken should work like. It must be nice to have been born into a state where you can simply take all that for granted and not have to worry about how the economics of it work, but that's not how it is here and that's not how it's going to be. I don't personally know anyone, regardless of general political stance, who doesn't see it as a serious problem that millions of Americans are unable to secure desperately needed healthcare because they can't afford it; but that doesn't translate into agreement about how we go about remedying that, step-by-step. Let alone the political hot potato of articulating what exactly you think the end goal should look like.
 
Last edited:
ntalwar said:


:huh:
Is that a result of the health care systems(the topic of this thread), or something else - diet, exercise, income level, etc?
Do doctors keep us thin?

God knows, all i'm really questioning is your ridiculous assumption that anitram hates America, and sorry I thought you were saying Americans in general weren't unhealthier than Europeans.

Like you?

Only when required, conversations go downhill when people make gross statements like 'you really must hate the US' and the likes of the generalisations made against the US ie 'Are americans really as fucking greedy, selfish and moronic as half the world thinks?'

Originally posted by dazzlingamy
Greedy - you have the highest obesity levels in the world

Obesity isn't anything to do with greed, poverty and education factor greatly into it.
 
... and the fact that in a lot of cases, the cheapest food is the least healthy (i.e., McDonald's).
 
I think there was a study done that showed McDonald's salads contained more fat than their burgers, maybe a fat tax? Force up the price of burgers bring down the prices of fruit and veg...not likely a feasible idea at all.

They banned McDonalds and co advertising around children's cartoons here...hopefully there will be some follow up to see if it has had any success.
 
LJT said:

Only when required, conversations go downhill when people make gross statements like 'you really must hate the US' and the likes of the generalisations made against the US ie 'Are americans really as fucking greedy, selfish and moronic as half the world thinks?'

You forgot the "gross statement" before mine that prompted my reaction. You didn't exactly do anything to bring the conversation uphill.
 
corianderstem said:
... and the fact that in a lot of cases, the cheapest food is the least healthy (i.e., McDonald's).

I don't believe they are the cheapest.

I do believe they are the easiest.

I ate an In n Out Cheese burger yesterday, no fries, cup of water - for dinner. About $3.00


I stopped at a produce store today and bought 5 bananas, one carrot and small amount of broccoli. $1.57

Tonight for dinner I will slice up the carrot and steam it with the broccoli
with a reasonable portion of brown rice.

I will eat 8 ounces of low fat vanilla yogurt.


Some of you may have seen the "weight in here" thread I did awhile back

I went from 173 pounds to about 152 pounds.

I am at 158 pounds, now.


My blood pressure is down, I am on a low doze med for it.

My triglyceride count is a bit high, I may have to go on cholesterol meds if I don't get my 1/2 hour of exercise three times a week in.

In my case,
taking off the weight plus exercise is an opportunity to significantly improve my health and I believe lengthen my life.


If I accomplish my goals I believe I will signifiacantly reduce my health costs, also.
 
yolland said:

I don't have anything like anitram's knowledge of healthcare economics, but my general impression is that most of the publically funded healthcare systems in place in the various (non-US) Western countries date to around WWII, and I'd imagine that that historical context--

Actually that isn't the case in Canada (although the UK is another story). Our universal health care legislation was enacted in 1968, and Tommy Douglas is largely credited with the passage of all the related acts, due to what he previously accomplished on a provincial level (in Saskatchewan).
 
I think that's enough of the back-and-forth over whose generalizations were most offensive...it's not a debate deserving of taking over the whole thread.
 
No problem, I just don't want to see us waste too much time and concern on that tangent.
anitram said:
Actually that isn't the case in Canada (although the UK is another story). Our universal health care legislation was enacted in 1968, and Tommy Douglas is largely credited with the passage of all the related acts, due to what he previously accomplished on a provincial level (in Saskatchewan).
Interesting. Are you familiar with what the healthcare system in place before that time was like? Did everything you have now more or less fall into place at once, or was it a phased process?
 
LJT said:
I think there was a study done that showed McDonald's salads contained more fat than their burgers, maybe a fat tax?
my salad was 60 calories

I lost 15 % of my body weight eating fast food.


Lunch at McDonalds or SubWay.

Hamburger 3.5 oz (100 g) 250 calories
Side Salad 3.1 oz (87 g) 20 calories
Vinaigrette 1.5 fl oz (44 ml) 40 calories


total = 310
good lunch for a 1200 calories a day diet.
cup of water and with taking time to chew and taste the food it was filling.






Double Quarter Pounder® with Cheese++ 9.8 oz (279 g) 740 calories

Southwest Salad with Crispy Chicken 12.4 oz (352 g) 400 calories

Coca-Cola® Classic (Large)§ 32 fl oz cup 310 calories


wow.
one meal is 1450 calories and most people only burn 2000 calories a day.


here is their web site, if anyone wants to know calorie and fat counts
 
I'm actually working on a Health Law casebook at the moment, interestingly enough. Otherwise I wouldn't know many of these things off the top of my head.

Initially there was a hodge podge of coverage. You had some private insurance, some employer co-pay insurance (much like in the US), and then the poor would be admitted to hospital on a charity basis, essentially. The way it evolved was basically like this: first, in Saskatchewan, a pilot program was started giving every citizen of SK free hospital coverage only. Then, a second program in a smaller town (can't remember which one off the top of my head) provided all the citizens in that town with complete, universal health insurance. When other provincial governments saw that this was functioning well and efficiently, a national commission was established with the view of expanding it throughout Canada. In 1958, every Canadian had free hospital services and 10 years later, the Medical Care Act was passed. This was eventually modernized into the act we have to day, The Canada Health Act, which establishes an agreement between the provinces and the federal government, outlining the five criteria which the provincial healthcare systems had to meet to qualify for a full federal cash contribution.

I will give you some statistics, as well so that you can see that this private healthcare by no means guarantees you more service or better service.

The OECD published a study in 2003, outlining health expenditures. The US health spending is 15% of total GDP (compared to Canada 9.9%, UK 7.7%, France 10.1%, Germany 11.1%, Japan 7.9%, Denmark 9%, etc). However, when you look at the # of acute beds per 1000, the US has less than all those countries. It has 2.8 acute beds/1000, compare to Canada 3.2, Germany 6.6, France 3.8, UK 3.7, Japan 8.5, Denmark 3.4. The US does have more MRIs per million than the UK, Canada, France and Germany, but lags behind Denmark (9.1 vs. 8.6) and REALLY lags behind Japan (8.6 v. 35.3).

The same study looked at other comparisons. The US has a lower life expectancy at birth than Canada (both men and women), a higher infant mortality rate, comparable cancer rates, considerably higher rates of cardiovascular deaths, higher rates of diabetes, obesity and smoking. I won't even compare to European countries because there the disparity is enormous. Plus, Canada and the US have more similar societies than the Europeans.

So that's just a quick overview for you.
 
Re: McDonald's - They've certainly made steps in the right direction to have healthier options.
 
It is also portion control

This is where a lot of us fall down



Where I live

Newport Beach CA
the donut shops sell bananas for 75 cents
and the "Stop and Go" market has both apples and bananas for 79 cents.

It is harder to justify getting that candy bar or bag of nacho cheese Doritos just because I need a snack and there nothing else.
 
Americans live for 2 years shorter than Canadians and some Western European countries, but I still think it's an uneven comparison. For example, African-Americans are 13% percent of the US population, and have a life expectancy of around 5 years less than white Americans. So, that will affect the average. Some Asian countries also have a life expectancy of 2 years longer than Canada and the Western European countries.
 
Last edited:
ntalwar said:
Americans live for 2 years shorter than Canadians and some Western European countries, but I still think it's an uneven comparison. For example, African-Americns are 13% percent of the US population, and have a life expectancy of around 5 years less than white Americans. So, that will affect the average. Some Asian countries also have a life expectancy of 2 years longer than Canada and the Western European countries.



seems a bit odd, to bring race in to the picture


I think people with good health care and better nutrition/ diet opportunities

live longer than people without

My guess is that "native Americans" live shorter lives
for the same reasons




goes to book shelve to dust off copy of
"Bell Curve"

oh yeah, don't own it and never will
 
Last edited:
ntalwar said:
Americans live for 2 years shorter than Canadians and some Western European countries, but I still think it's an uneven comparison. For example, African-Americans are 13% percent of the US population, and have a life expectancy of around 5 years less than white Americans. So, that will affect the average. Some Asian countries also have a life expectancy of 2 years longer than Canada and the Western European countries.

Americans live 3 years shorter than Canadians (men and women) per OECD. If you look at Japan, their men live only 1 year longer than Canadian men and 4 years longer than American men, so it is not as huge of a difference - Asians used to have a greater disparity 10-15 years ago.

A good question to ask is why do African Americans live 5 years shorter and whether this is a genetic issue or a failure of the social safety net? Life expectancy is indirectly related to health care. People who have yearly physicals and who have their own family physician who monitors them and advises them about their diet, their weight, and any fluctuations in their cholesterol levels, who does routine and regular blood work, takes urine samples and so on are going to live healthier. Poor people do not see the doctor as often, and preventive medicine plays a small role in their overall wellbeing. If you have a healthcare system which is beyond the reach of these most at-risk populations, that is certainly going to play a role in their lifetime expectancy.
 
deep said:




seems a bit odd, to bring race in to the picture


I think people with good health care and better nutrition/ diet opportunities

live longer than people without

My guess is that "native Americans" live shorter lives
for the same reasons




goes to book shelve to dust off copy of
"Bell Curve"

oh yeah, don't own it and never will
Good nutrition for one population may not be good for another, look at incidences of lactose intolerance across the different asian and native american populations compared to european populations.

Curse the racist enzyme!

Although I think that poverty has a much stronger effect on mortality since it just makes people even less likely to take preventative measures against diseases that they may be predisposed to, just look at the third world life expectancy our aboriginal population enjoys.
 
Last edited:
deep said:


seems a bit odd, to bring race in to the picture



Which I did because the CDC tracks it:



But it looks like life expectancies are going up for everyone, which is good news.
 
Last edited:
A_Wanderer said:
Good nutrition for one population may not be good for another, look at incidences of lactose intolerance across the different asian and native american populations compared to european populations.

Curse the racist enzyme!

Although I think that poverty has a much
This middle aged white man
living on the beach is CA
is Lactose intolerant.

I think we are doing too much dairy.

It is killing the palnet and us - heart disease.

After adolescence we should cut way back.

I am sure there are some nutritionist looking in
that can weigh in on this.
 
ntalwar said:



Which I did because the CDC tracks it:



But it looks like life expectancies are going up for everyone, which is good news.

I do get what you are saying.

My guess is that the "native people" in Canada have shorter life spans, too.

And if they are 15-20% of that population
I would not want to separate them out to presuppose a higher average.

A National average includes all Nationals regardless of sub-group category.

It is good to look at sub-groups
to learn what we can do for groups that are at greater risk.
 
deep said:


And if they are 15-20% of that population
I would not want to separate them out to presuppose a higher average.

Actually about three and a half percent, but I get what you're saying as well.
 
ntalwar said:



Which I did because the CDC tracks it:



But it looks like life expectancies are going up for everyone, which is good news.


The thing that jumps out at me from this graph is how much lower male life expectancies are by comparison to female, for both races.

But to merely draw attention to this is to invite ridicule from the so-called liberals, as we've seen in other threads on this forum.
 
deep said:

This middle aged white man
living on the beach is CA
is Lactose intolerant.

I think we are doing too much dairy.

It is killing the palnet and us - heart disease.

After adolescence we should cut way back.

I am sure there are some nutritionist looking in
that can weigh in on this.

I am very lactose intolerant as well.

Giving cow's milk to young babies has some serious potential consequences (think juvenile diabetes). This was a very important finding by a research team in Toronto, several years ago. The dairy industry and dairy lobby have done a very good job. It is only a few decades ago that governments used to subsidize diary farmers in their battle against the evils of margarine. And today, there are still jurisdictions (Quebec most notably), where margarine has to be a certain colour, lest the public confuse it with wholesome butter.
 
financeguy said:

But to merely draw attention to this is to invite ridicule from the so-called liberals, as we've seen in other threads on this forum.

It's not a conservative/liberal thing for me. I merely used the government chart for statistical reasons, because it's proven that race and gender are factors in life expectancy for certain countries. E.g. life expectancy of a native American male versus a native Canadian male, or a white American woman versus a white French woman takes many of the factors out of the comparison, and is more credible.
 
Back
Top Bottom