Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A lot of it has to do with one's attitudes towards food. As some people say, "Do you eat to live? Or do you live to eat?"
I never had a weight problem but then again, I've never been a big eater and drinker and I try to eat healthy. I know someone who had to go on weight watchers and she would say things like, "I have to have a dessert or I feel deprived." huh? She has to load some extra calories on after dinner. A can of beer too. Then she would wonder why she gained weight and she would resent it when I put milk in my coffee! The few calories in the tiny amount of milk vs her desserts and beer.
What do you mean by "resent it"? She was critical of you putting milk in your coffee because of the calories? It would be bizarre for her to feel that way after her dessert and beer. I wonder if you misunderstood her.
And, I can understand her desire to have dessert. A lot of people like to have dessert.
Do you think you aren't a big eater because you're smarter than your friend? More willpower than your friend?
A lot of it has to do with one's attitudes towards food. As some people say, "Do you eat to live? Or do you live to eat?"
I never had a weight problem but then again, I've never been a big eater and drinker and I try to eat healthy. I know someone who had to go on weight watchers and she would say things like, "I have to have a dessert or I feel deprived." huh? She has to load some extra calories on after dinner. A can of beer too. Then she would wonder why she gained weight and she would resent it when I put milk in my coffee! The few calories in the tiny amount of milk vs her desserts and beer.
I never have room for dessert. I can't remember the last time I've had desert. It has been over 20 years. At least!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles
And, I can understand her desire to have dessert. A lot of people like to have dessert.
I love dessert! I never have it because I'm always full after having a meal. I always talk about going out sometime just to have dessert. Dessert alone would fill me up. But I never bother. I don't ever go specifically out of my way to eat anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles
Do you think you aren't a big eater because you're smarter than your friend? More willpower than your friend?
It's just how we are naturally. Our minds and bodies don't crave food unless we're hungry and our stomachs fill up quickly. We don't have to work at it.
What do you mean by "resent it"? She was critical of you putting milk in your coffee because of the calories? It would be bizarre for her to feel that way after her dessert and beer. I wonder if you misunderstood her.
And, I can understand her desire to have dessert. A lot of people like to have dessert.
Do you think you aren't a big eater because you're smarter than your friend? More willpower than your friend?
Yes, she really did remark about me putting milk in my coffee--said something sarcastic about the calories. That could be part of what I mean by the attitude toward food. It doesn't make sense. People will forgo cake and regular meals and then drink beer and have an ice cream cone for no rhyme or reason. Then they get mad at someone who ate normally all day but puts a teaspoon of milk in their coffee. Someone who isn't overweight can do fine with or without dessert. Doesn't matter that much. But this person HAS to have dessert--HAS to have it. It can't be a dish of fruit either.
No, I am not smarter than my friend, she is smarter than I am in most ways. She's got a funny thing about food though. It's not rational. She also has to have her house loaded with food or she gets nervous. When we went on vacations together the eating was one of the main focuses for her and for me that was the least.
I can forget to eat. It's not a good thing but I don't think about food very much, especially if I'm busy doing something else. It might be something in the way we were raised but I really have no idea. Some people start to compensate for emptiness in their lives with food--who knows??
My girlfriend sleep-eats. She has woken up in bed to find that she ate an entire big bag of potato chips with crumbs everywhere. The weight isn't an illness, but the sleep-eating is definitely an illness.
Yes, but should they start paying for other stuff too? I was obese but not morbidly so. I still had a "disease" so why shouldn't they pay for my "treatment"?
I don't really have an answer for that. Just because someone has a disease, it doesn't mean insurance pays for every possible treatment option. My insurance won't pay for me to see a naturopath, for instance.
Obviously people doing what they are doing right now isn't working for our nation. If this helps, then it is a good thing. I'd think people would want to be more progressive in this regard.
To be serious about the implications of this for a moment...
This could change how insurance handles choice-based illness and/or cognizant-created illness. What I mean by that:
Someone who is obese because of overeating - insurance might cover a diagnostic for them. And if it's determined that this particular patient's reason for overeating is - he just really loves good tasting foods and doesn't care what the newspaper articles say about heart disease, he's earned the right to eat what he wants, so nya nya nya...that patient - will not be covered by insurance for ANY obesity-related illness.
However - the patient who is suffering from a psychiatric disorder, that makes her depressed, and triggers endorphin production when she eats sugary foods, who has equated eating sugary foods with feeling good, which makes her obese, which makes her depressed, which makes her eat more sugar..THAT person will be covered by her insurance plan to treat the depression and the obesity itself.
Some people might end up falling inbetween - they love eating, but they -also- have some kind of "issue" that makes them use food as a crutch, when they could choose something else. For them, the "issue" itself would be covered, but the obesity would not.
It might also make insurance companies provide a certain minimum dollar amount for every insured subscriber, toward a gym or personal training of their choice, if they wish to take advantage of it and their physician recommends that they do so to improve failing health as a result of obesity.
I don't really have an answer for that. Just because someone has a disease, it doesn't mean insurance pays for every possible treatment option. My insurance won't pay for me to see a naturopath, for instance.
Obviously people doing what they are doing right now isn't working for our nation. If this helps, then it is a good thing. I'd think people would want to be more progressive in this regard.
I don't have the answer either. I can see it adding extra costs and layers of bureaucracy to the system, though. I don't know that it will truly help many people. Nobody can fix the problem but the person themselves. They have to want it but what do you do if they just don't care or their weight is not their highest priority? I don't know.
Since they've already done it, I hope it does help people. I guess I'm just a pessimist.
Like alcoholics, smokers and people with OCD are lazy? Yeah, those addictions are just the same as a food addiction. Why not drugs for that as well?
This was in response to my comment about people people being lazy. I don't understand what you're saying in this rep. To start, there are drugs for the conditions listed above. I find it silly that you compare OCD to addiction, though. Anyhow, my assertion is that our society is generally lazy. People will take blood pressure meds, cholesterol meds, etc, before giving a healthy life style a really good go for at least a year. That's not anything new.
As far as addiction goes- in the end the person has to buck up. There's no way around it. I smoked for more than 20 years. I crave almost every day still. I get it. Makes no difference. Frankly, the drugs offered to combat these addictions are just as horrible to experience than withdrawal.
I don't have the answer either. I can see it adding extra costs and layers of bureaucracy to the system, though. I don't know that it will truly help many people. Nobody can fix the problem but the person themselves. They have to want it but what do you do if they just don't care or their weight is not their highest priority? I don't know.
Since they've already done it, I hope it does help people. I guess I'm just a pessimist.
Well if it saves costs down the line wouldn't it be beneficial?
At the very least I think some people could benefit from some nutritional counseling. I don't think we can assume everyone has the same knowledge base regarding portion control and healthier choices.
This was in response to my comment about people people being lazy. I don't understand what you're saying in this rep. To start, there are drugs for the conditions listed above. I find it silly that you compare OCD to addiction, though. Anyhow, my assertion is that our society is generally lazy. People will take blood pressure meds, cholesterol meds, etc, before giving a healthy life style a really good go for at least a year. That's not anything new.
There is no such thing as lazy. A person isn't lazy; He is just doing what he wants to do.
Lazy is what person A calls person B when person B doesn't do what person A wants Person B to do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
