Jump to content
Forums upgraded! Read more... ×
cn-nadc.net | North Atlantic Defense Coalition
Sign in to follow this  
bgorre1013

Can we discriminate on weight

Recommended Posts

 

Gruneun  7 hours ago
  •  
  •  

"The tray that slides in and out of the machine could break. Instead, she
was denied potentially life-saving information in a crisis."

For the sake of argument, how many people would be denied potentially life-saving information in a crisis if the technician didn't properly enforce the restrictions, her added weight did break it, and the machine was now inaccessible to everyone?

 
 
  •  
    avatar92.jpg?1327959337
    Mike Hunt  Gruneun  6 hours ago
    •  
    •  

    Exactly. Also those machines cost a couple million dollars. The hospital has every right to be protective of their expensive equipment.

     
     
  •  
    avatar92.jpg?1357240606
    jenn  Gruneun  5 hours ago
    •  
    •  

    Not only that, imagine the lawsuit when someone gets injured as that tray is breaking. "You KNEW the machine could break under my weight, yet you did nothing!" cha-ching! Hospitals face enough lawsuits for things that couldn't be prevented there is no way to expect them to leave themselves open for stuff like this on top of it.

     
     
  •  
    avatar92.jpg?1357248247
    PhillyEric  Gruneun  4 hours ago

    This was the part of the article that bugged me the most. The simple reality is that items are going to be designed for an average-sized person, so unusually built people (whether they are too tall, too short or too heavy) will sometimes face inconveniences; that's not discrimination, its reality.

    Allowing someone to use a machine not built to accommodate them makes no sense. And while it would be nice if every MRI machine was built to accommodate every possible body type, this simply isn't realistic, and would make the machines that much more expensive.

     

    I thought these were all great points ^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe someone should not be diagnosed as "FAT". First off some of the systems of BMI scales are not accurate. I have a buddy in my unit who was categorized as over-weight because they measured his waist and neck. He has a small and thick neck but can get perfect scores on his physical fitness tests. There are cases of people who gain weight and is their own damned fault but these cases could be a psychological problem. Food addictions, eating your pain away, etc....In some cases a "fat person" can be healthier then others. I have skinny friends who smoke and drink all the time. The only reason they are skinny is because they spend all their money on cigs and not food. The nicotine keeps them from feeling hungry... The testing on obesity should go more into the looks on the outside but also the physical health and mental health of the patient. The thing is it all comes down to greed and money... Health insurance companies want to make money not lose it because of an unhealthy patient always needing attention. These companies would lose money...even though they have plenty of money. The discrimination comes purely from greed.. in my opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot speak for testing methods, but in my opinion, if somebody is putting others at risk for being overweight, then they should be subject to possible discrimination. I'm not saying lets hate on anybody overweight, because I don't hold any grudges, but when it comes to the safety of a group and everybody else is put at risk because of that, we need to re-evaluate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll read the OP tomorrow, but as a quick, possibly related entry, check this out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wintersky from MCXA

 

Unfortunately the claim/entitlement culture that exists in the western world is chasing more problems than the cost of the issues it fixes. Common sense once prevailed but now every idiot with the money to afford one can get a lawyer for the most trivial of things. Personal safety,( obese people on chairs exceeding weight limits etc) is your responsibility as well as the owner/proprietors. 

 

I'm not against helping people, everyone is human after all but they must want to help themselves out of their situation via obtainable realisitc targets for each person.

 

Side note, I fn hate mobility scooters and the people who try and drive over you. I am whole heartedly behind suing the sugar out of them for hitting you with their motorised vehicle. Hell where i live they need to be on the road

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is, what's classified as "healthy"?  Simply not having disease?  If so, then yes, they are healthy.  But if they're not "healthy" enough to walk up a flight of stairs without being winded or go walking through a store without hurting because they're putting too much strain on their body, then yes, I can discriminate.  And personally, I will.

 

It's fine to have a little fat on you (I have a gut, which personally I am trying to work off, but I'm not calling myself fat because of it), but when more than 50% of your body weight is fat, that is NOT okay.  I understand that you may have an issue (thyroid, for example) that makes you swell up like a balloon, but if you don't and you're 5'4" and eat ~6000 calories a day without exercise, then I have every right to call you a fat-ass.  Don't like it? Do something about it.

 

EDIT - And I guess I should talk about the hospital point.  If you're going to break the equipment, you shouldn't be allowed on it.  Plain and simple.  Just like if the weight limit on an elevator is 600 pounds, don't test it.  It's going to be your fault when you get stuck because you were too lazy to walk up a flight of stairs.

 

EDIT 2 - And this is why I call myself the superficial gentleman >_>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That lat bit at the end of the article is golden.  A great test of how good of a state you are in is how well/fast you can get off of the floor.  I hope medical practitioners are using that test a lot.

As for equipment and tools design - well, if you are left-handed or short or dislexic or near-sighted or far-sighted, or, well, anything except average, you've run into it.  This is part of the next technological revolution - expanding and adapting technology and tools to apply in more cases to a larger percentage of the population.  This goes for everything from scissors to countertops to MRI machines.  It's not discrimination if it's not designed for you. It's either a design oversight or a tradeoff for some other desirable characteristic (cost, portability, efficiency, etc).  In this MRI case, call the company that makes the machine, the salespeople for the machine, and the government or funding organization for the hospital.  Or call the media.  Otherwise, good luck ever driving change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw, here's a different type of weight discrimination:

 

-my ice hockey teammates bully me for being smaller than all of them. any advice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MrGriffin - I agree, BMI is only ever an indicator and should be applied with a touch of common sense. Any rugby player (or American Football player) will be classed as overweight or even obese by their BMI, and those guys are all superbly fit and healthy.

 

Scotia - join a different team ;)

 

On the equipment issue - most things in this world are built for the average person. That means a sub-6-foot, right-handed person. Hell, I've never found a seat on public transport (except the older bench-style seats) that is comfortable for my height, and I'm 6 foot (not particularly tall, but still above average). Is that discrimination? Balls. It is about creating a mass-produced item that will accommodate the majority of people.

 

 

All that being said, I do agree that overweight people are often harshly judged. Lazy, no self-control, stupid, etc etc.

Some are. Not all. We shouldn't really assume anything about a person until we know what is going on.

 

For example -

There was some recent research that discovered that some people just don't get the same 'I'm full' signals from their stomach, so they eat more.

 

In addition, fat kids means poor parenting (not just the usual puppy fat, most kids get that), and when you're a fat kid it is not easy to become a slim adult.

Even as adults, fat people are often being fed by somebody else (parent, partner, friend).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no respect for fat (yes I said it) people who have no pre-existing health issue (like unavoidable health problems that come with age). Some would say that I eat unhealthily which they are most likely right. But when a person runs over 10 miles a day to train for 5k's and 1600 meter races they have a right to eat what they see fit. People should take responsibility for their weight and make adjustments to insure their personal health. Exercise isn't fun but unless you're living off the land and hunting wild deer through the forest for your next meal, exercise is necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no respect for fat (yes I said it) people who have no pre-existing health issue (like unavoidable health problems that come with age). Some would say that I eat unhealthily which they are most likely right. But when a person runs over 10 miles a day to train for 5k's and 1600 meter races they have a right to eat what they see fit. People should take responsibility for their weight and make adjustments to insure their personal health. Exercise isn't fun but unless you're living off the land and hunting wild deer through the forest for your next meal, exercise is necessary.

I think this is the first thing we have ever agreed on :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Weight is 99.9% of the time how much you eat.

2. The vast majority of overweight and underweight people thinks they are the exception (at least initially).

3. Health (the part of it you can influence) is almost entirely what you eat, whether you excercise or not, smoke or not, and your environement.

4. Underweight has its own sets of dangers and is about as dangerous as overweight, though is less obvious to the individual and those around him/her.

 

Edit: also, for those who like television shows, Supersize vs Superskinny is fairly good at presenting some of the dangers of each to the couch potatos out there. Season 4 is probably the better of the bunch. Here's an episode:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, indeed, in the majority of the cases, fat people HAVE no one to blame but themselves and/or their parents for their overweightness...

As for diets: If you suddenly start eating half or less of what you ate before, OF COURSE your body is going to react to that. the difference is far too big.

 

Of course, eating the right quantity and exercising enough IS hard. while there are some general numbers, everyone is still different. Some will need more food than others, and some can stand eating too much/too fat better than others.

 

For 99% of the cases, though, yes, they have good reason to discriminate against fat people. Also, in most of those cases they ALSO take the discrimination too far.

 

 

And finally, exercise alone is not enough. It must be frequent, long and intense enough, though intensity doesn't really seem to need to be greater than a brisk walk in most cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×