Rob's House Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 What am I trying to impose on you exactly? Should action not be taken if a parent is starving their child? If your actual point is that in some extreme situations it may be feasible for social services to intervene when a child is allowed to become morbidly obese without a medical condition to account for it, then maybe it would sound a little less oppressive. Consistency check: How would you deal with the tofu eating, sh*t composting, Indian hair tampon using, bath hating hippies who refuse to have their children vaccinated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 12, 2011 Author Share Posted April 12, 2011 Like I'm pulling all of this out of my ass or introducing some new radical idea by linking body fat percentage to obesity... For the sake of argument, let's say >35% for females and >30% for males. Maybe a bit higher, maybe not. If you meet that criteria, you are definitely a fat-ass. If your kid meets that criteria, you are not being a responsible parent. http://exercise.about.com/cs/weightloss/a/bodyfat.htm At what body fat percentage would you consider that a parent is starving his or her child? So you would like to legislate a body fat percentage range? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 If your actual point is that in some extreme situations it may be feasible for social services to intervene when a child is allowed to become morbidly obese without a medical condition to account for it, then maybe it would sound a little less oppressive. Consistency check: How would you deal with the tofu eating, sh*t composting, Indian hair tampon using, bath hating hippies who refuse to have their children vaccinated? Childhood vaccinations should not be optional by the same logic. I am extremely anti-anti-vax. So you would like to legislate a body fat percentage range? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Childhood vaccinations should not be optional by the same logic. I am extremely anti-anti-vax. Yes. Your intentions are spot on! It's just that your means to this end is a pandora's box that would certainly bring about a not-so-free society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Your intentions are spot on! It's just that your means to this end is a pandora's box that would certainly bring about a not-so-free society. What's so "Pandora's Box" about expanding the definition of child abuse/neglect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 What's so "Pandora's Box" about expanding the definition of child abuse/neglect? legislating body fat? You dont see that as an avenue to more restrictive legislation down the road? I do We talked about this before, not this specific topic but in how to motivate human and corporate behavior. I just dont believe that restricting forms of motivation is the most effective way to achieve results, I am more of a .... I think you know what I'm gonna say. incentive based person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 legislating body fat? You dont see that as an avenue to more restrictive legislation down the road? I do We talked about this before, not this specific topic but in how to motivate human and corporate behavior. I just dont believe that restricting forms of motivation is the most effective way to achieve results, I am more of a .... I think you know what I'm gonna say. incentive based person. We're talking about minors here, those who cannot choose for themselves. There's a big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Childhood vaccinations should not be optional by the same logic. I am extremely anti-anti-vax. Except that vaccinations and obesity are not even remotely the same thing. It's the difference between "public health" and "individual health". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Except that vaccinations and obesity are not even remotely the same thing. It's the difference between "public health" and "individual health". Vaccinations have to do with both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 For the sake of argument, let's say >35% for females and >30% for males. Maybe a bit higher, maybe not. If you meet that criteria, you are definitely a fat-ass. If your kid meets that criteria, you are not being a responsible parent. And precisely what action should the government take if someones kid exceeds those percentages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 And precisely what action should the government take if someones kid exceeds those percentages? Fines to help subsidize the increased burden on the healthcare system? I'd be in favor of using "what to do if the parents are under-nourishing their child" as a guideline. You don't own your child. You have a responsibility to make good decisions as a parent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Fines to help subsidize the increased burden on the healthcare system? I'd be in favor of using "what to do if the parents are under-nourishing their child" as a guideline.You don't own your child. You have a responsibility to make good decisions as a parent. Removal from the home and becoming wards of the state? Or fines based on what, a weekly/monthly weigh in? Have you given any thought to what you're proposing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Removal from the home and becoming wards of the state? Or fines based on what, a weekly/monthly weigh in? Have you given any thought to what you're proposing? I'm not trying to say it's an easy problem or that there is a clear-cut way to deal with it. That said, I would not have a problem with fines + monthly weigh-ins. You solution is to do nothing because if you want to have fat kids, well this is America dammit. Maybe a good compromise (as a start) would be to mandate nutritious, sensible school lunches and not allow brown-bags full of the crap that their parents normally fatten them up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 We're talking about minors here, those who cannot choose for themselves. There's a big difference. So it's always the parents fault when their kid decides to sit in his room and play video games and crams ho-ho's in his mouth all day long. I also think there's more to how much our children eat that is causing people to be fat. Look at the size of chicken breasts these days. Do you think that growth hormones that are plumping up our food is being passed on to us and plumping us up too. You are what you eat after all. You are going down a very slippery slope here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I'm not trying to say it's an easy problem or that there is a clear-cut way to deal with it. That said, I would not have a problem with fines + monthly weigh-ins. You solution is to do nothing because if you want to have fat kids, well this is America dammit. Maybe a good compromise (as a start) would be to mandate nutritious, sensible school lunches and not allow brown-bags full of the crap that their parents normally fatten them up with. Well honest of you to admit it's "just a start". What if dinner at home after this sensible lunch doesn't meet your standards? How will the massive new agency you are creating know about that? And what will they do about it? What about weekends? Summer vacation? If being slim and trim was as easy as eating a apple for lunch the multi-Billion dollar wight loss industry would not exist in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 So it's always the parents fault when their kid decides to sit in his room and play video games and crams ho-ho's in his mouth all day long. I also think there's more to how much our children eat that is causing people to be fat. Look at the size of chicken breasts these days. Do you think that growth hormones that are plumping up our food is being passed on to us and plumping us up too. You are what you eat after all. You are going down a very slippery slope here. As a parent, YOU are deciding what is available for them to eat. Smack the ho-hos out of their mouth, take the video games and TV away and make them go play outside. Have some RESPONSIBILITY for your children. You're parroting the typical "victim" mentality that you all like to claim the left is constantly guilty of. "It's not my fault my kid is fat and lazy!" Yes, it is. The growth hormones argument you're trying to make is not valid/based in reality. It's a bunch of hippy nonsense. Well honest of you to admit it's "just a start". What if dinner at home after this sensible lunch doesn't meet your standards? How will the massive new agency you are creating know about that? And what will they do about it? What about weekends? Summer vacation? If being slim and trim was as easy as eating a apple for lunch the multi-Billion dollar wight loss industry would not exist in this country. I'm not creating anything - child services already exists. The fact that a problem is hard does not mean that nothing should be done about it. Again it's not your fault you and your kids are fat! You're all victims! Oh, dear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Vaccinations have to do with both. No, they really don't. Vaccinations are only truly effective individually in the presence of herd immunity. And conversely...dieting is completely effective in the presence of herd obesity. (I.e. my being a fat-ass doesn't preclude you from eating well and exercising). So yes, they are completely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 No, they really don't. Vaccinations are only truly effective individually in the presence of herd immunity. This isn't the first time you've challenged my understanding of vaccination. I'm well aware of the concept and value of herd immunity. You're saying that my MMR shot gives me no added resistance to measles in the absence of a certain level of vaccination within the rest of the population? As a side note, I'm sure you're aware that you're only strengthening the argument for mandated vaccination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 (edited) Fines to help subsidize the increased burden on the healthcare system? I'd be in favor of using "what to do if the parents are under-nourishing their child" as a guideline. You don't own your child. You have a responsibility to make good decisions as a parent. I'm not trying to say it's an easy problem or that there is a clear-cut way to deal with it. That said, I would not have a problem with fines + monthly weigh-ins. You solution is to do nothing because if you want to have fat kids, well this is America dammit. Maybe a good compromise (as a start) would be to mandate nutritious, sensible school lunches and not allow brown-bags full of the crap that their parents normally fatten them up with. Mandating 'nutritious, sensible school lunches' is a great way to start under-nourishing kids. As you would be hard pressed to find kids that would be willing to eat the crud that passes for school lunches more than 2-3 times / week. My gut feel is that any attempt at mandating school lunches would probably result in kids consuming additional empty calories as they hit the candy machines to fill up after eating 3 or so bites of what they were supposed to be eating. I'd also be interested in seeing some stats on which income levels produce which percentages of the 'fat' kids. My guess is the lower deciles are overrepresented. If that's the case, what good would fines produce? This looks more like a money grab by the lunch provider (supported by well meaning dolts) than anything else. Edited April 12, 2011 by Taro T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 This isn't the first time you've challenged my understanding of vaccination. I'm well aware of the concept and value of herd immunity. You're saying that my MMR shot gives me no added resistance to measles in the absence of a certain level of vaccination within the rest of the population? "No added resistance"? No. Limited added resistance, yes. As a side note, I'm sure you're aware that you're only strengthening the argument for mandated vaccination. And I'm perfectly fine with that. Government involvement in public health, I'm absolutely okay with, included mandated vaccination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts