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.
Fundamentally, it's a mess because we make ourselves sick with unhealthy lifestyle choices and then fight about how much the bill is and who should pay it instead of finding ways to incentivize healthy behaviors without being draconian about it.
Dan Buettner leads the way with some fairly simple ways to make healthy lifestyle choices the default choices instead of the exception. America now spends over $1 Trillion a year treating diseases that are largely preventable. The healthiest societies in the world actually don't use that much health care:
I completely agree, and was delighted to see a Republican Congressman complain on TV yesterday that 44% of adults on Food Stamps are obese. Not just overweight... OBESE. There's absolutely no reason for that other than that we are force feeding them too much free food at taxpayers' expense, and then taxpayers will have to pay AGAIN for the health care they'll need for their obesity-related illnesses.
That's absolutely insane!
There's 43 million people on food stamps. 45% are under age 18. That means 24 million are adults and 44% would make 10 million obese. The average adult obesity rate in the US is 36% so subtracting the 10 million food stamp holders still leaves 81 million obese adults.
Therefore, having food stamps only slightly increases the likelihood of obesity. It's an illogical and classist conclusion that people are obese bc you're giving them free food.
There's 43 million people on food stamps. 45% are under age 18. That means 24 million are adults and 44% would make 10 million obese. The average adult obesity rate in the US is 36% so subtracting the 10 million food stamp holders still leaves 81 million obese adults.
Therefore, having food stamps only slightly increases the likelihood of obesity. It's an illogical and classist conclusion that people are obese bc you're giving them free food.
Nope. Receiving Food Stamps increases an adult's chance of being obese by a full 33%.
The USDA has published the statistics, and the USDA OIG explains why it's happening...
The obesity rates of the poor on food stamps compared to the poor who aren't on food stamps, and compared to the rest of the population:
Income-eligible children on food stamps: 24%
Income-eligible children NOT on food stamps: 20% Non-poor children who of course don't even qualify for food stamps: 13%
Income-eligible adults on food stamps: 44% obese
Income-eligible adults NOT on food stamps: 33% obese Non-poor adults who of course don't even qualify for food stamps: 32% obese
It certainly does appear that the children of poor and low-income families who receive free school breakfast, lunch, etc., program meals, regardless of whether they get food stamps, are being overfed.
Additionally, the USDA OIG (Office of the Inspector General) suggests there's a problem with poor and low-income families stacking multiple public assistance benefitsfor the exact same meals (e.g., parents given food stamps to pay for providing breakfast and lunch for their children, but their children are eating at school - free breakfast and lunch programs and sometimes dinner, too, even in the summer and on school holidays). That enables the food stamp recipient adults to overeat.
According to the OIG, 59% of families on food stamps simultaneously get benefitsfrom 2 or more major free food programs for the exact same daily meals. That fact published by the USDA OIG.
Are we really doing the poor any favors by causing their obesity by letting them double-dip and sometimes even triple-dip government free food program benefits, thereby enabling their overeating and ruining their health?
Nope. Receiving Food Stamps increases an adult's chance of being obese by a full 33%.
The USDA has published the statistics, and the USDA OIG explains why it's happening...
The obesity rates of the poor on food stamps compared to the poor who aren't on food stamps, and compared to the rest of the population:
Income-eligible children on food stamps: 24%
Income-eligible children NOT on food stamps: 20% Non-poor children who of course don't even qualify for food stamps: 13%
Income-eligible adults on food stamps: 44% obese
Income-eligible adults NOT on food stamps: 33% obese Non-poor adults who of course don't even qualify for food stamps: 32% obese
It certainly does appear that the children of poor and low-income families who receive free school breakfast, lunch, etc., program meals, regardless of whether they get food stamps, are being overfed.
Additionally, the USDA OIG (Office of the Inspector General) suggests there's a problem with poor and low-income families stacking multiple public assistance benefitsfor the exact same meals (e.g., parents given food stamps to pay for providing breakfast and lunch for their children, but their children are eating at school - free breakfast and lunch programs and sometimes dinner, too, even in the summer and on school holidays). That enables the food stamp recipient adults to overeat.
According to the OIG, 59% of families on food stamps simultaneously get benefitsfrom 2 or more major free food programs for the exact same daily meals. That fact published by the USDA OIG.
Are we really doing the poor any favors by causing their obesity by letting them double-dip and sometimes even triple-dip government free food program benefits, thereby enabling their overeating and ruining their health?
You're using limited data to reach a conclusion. Even if people on fs are more likely to be obese, it doesn't mean that fs made them obese. You'd have to have decades of data that charted their weights before the fs. If I'm 300 lbs today and get fs tomorrow, I'm now an obese fs holder and I become part of their statistics even though I came to the party obese.
the health care system is a mess because government got involved with both feet at all levels. get government out of health care, and bring back real competition, and you will see prices go down.
I agree. There is no reason the govt should be involved in a person's health insurance; and I even wonder why employers get involved. We have to purchase our own car insurance; home/renter's insurance so why not our own health insurance?
My point is that the data doesn't prove that the fs caused the obesity bc there's no way to know if the person was obese beforehand.
Income-eligible adults who DON'T get Food Stamps: 33% obesity rate
Income-eligible adults who DO get Food Stamps: 44% obesity rate
Without Food Stamps, the obesity rate is in line with all other non-poor adults (32% obesity rate).
With Food Stamps, adults' obesity rate is 33% higher.
It's pretty clear what needs to be done. Eliminate Food Stamps for obese adults.
I see all kinds of health food and vitamin stores opening up in my city. Everyone wants to stay well now so they don't need to go to the doctor, a lot can't afford insurance on their own anyway.
I recently got on Medicare and my doctor bills have gone up. Most people say who cares since the government will pay most of it but WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. And health care costs keeps going up and up. Just like college tuitions after the government suck their nose in it. Nice huh?
Also, I would have never gone on Medicare if I had a choice but the government will fine you if you don't. Another nice idea they have to control us. Plus I also need supplement insurance as well.
Interesting. Most Americans on Medicare are very happy with it.
'...Americans' satisfaction with the way the healthcare system works for them varies by the type of insurance they have. Satisfaction is highest among those with veterans or military health insurance, Medicare and Medicaid, and is lower among those with employer-paid and self-paid insurance. Americans with no health insurance are least satisfied of all..."
Good explanation about what happened to the health care system.
Good? The author had a desired conclusion and cherry- picked facts to support the conclusion and in doing so ignored other factors:
The adult obesity rate in the US has quadrupled since the 60's. 3/4 of the adult population is overweight/ obese. Weight increases vulnerability to Diabetes 2, heart disease, stroke, some cancers and joint deterioration.
Medical conditions that were once fatal are now treatable and in some cases, curable. No one could imagine organ transplants, let alone that public insurance would cover a heart transplant for a seriously wealthy 70 year old.
The HMO healthcare model emerged in the 70's. In 1973, the federal government required employers who offered and sponsored a healthcare benefit to offer at least one HMO option. The majority of insured people were insured under their employer's healthcare plans, then as now. This pushed insurers into offering managed healthcare and networks to compete with the HMO model.
Congress has denied Medicare the ability to negotiate / regulate the cost of medications and did so while expanding Medicare to include a prescription drug benefit. Congress chose to look out for the interests of Big Pharma before the people. That Congress took this action on the cusp of the oldest baby boomers turning 65 and therefore eligible for Medicare is significant.
Why is it the same medications can be purchased in Canada for a fraction of the price paid in the US?
Ignores that states allow lower costing physician assistants and nurse practitioners to perform functions that were once performed by General and family practitioners and how most MDs now pursue more lucrative specialties.
Author seems to be inclined to promote importing foreign educated healthcare providers to reduce costs. Author also seems a tad inclined to favor reducing demand for healthcare, thus cost, by denying it to those who cannot pay.
It ignores the rest of the developed world and then some, manage to offer equal or better healthcare to its population at a lower cost. No two countries do Universal healthcare the same way. Some rely on a Single Payer Model. Some rely exclusively on private insurance payer. Most are a mixed bag as is the US. All mandate everyone be insured. All subsidize low/ no income. All do not allow discrimination by medical condition or age.
None are as controlled by healthcare lobbies as is the US or seem o have state and federal governments who put the best interests of those lobbies before those of their people.
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.
