Techchick, honest question: do you oppose tax dollars going to research cancer cures?
Techchick, honest question: do you oppose tax dollars going to research cancer cures?
As a matter of fact I do.
Don’t poopoo me here as I have personal experience with cancer, my mother died in 1983 of colon cancer, I was 15 years old by two days when she passed.
The reality is, the government has no Constitutional guarantee to provide us with health care including research for cancer or any other health realted issue.
In fact, I do believe that private enterprise would be better off funding it’s own research with regards to health issues without the hands of the government dipped in it.
Government funding only creates potential for restrictions on such research. It’s a given.
Section 25.5-1-603 of the proposed Colorado senate bill says:
How do I measure my body mass index? And what do square meters (which measure area) have to do with it? I wanna know if I should avoid driving through Colorado in the near future.
The truth, as always, is more complicated than that.
You know what? In one of the gun-control threads, I may have jokingly said something like the following:
Dear Colorado senate: The above was a JOKE!!! Just a joke! I didn’t really mean it!! I never intended for you guys to take it seriously!!!
You can calculate your BMI here.
tracer, you goof < giggle >
What were you thinking???
You say it it becomes law, sheesh, don’t you know that by now < grin >
my BMI is 23.1 how is that measured? They took nothing else in consideration like I am female or that I have larger muscle mass than the average woman my size etc…
What does it mean?
That’s one of the problems with BMI. It doesn’t know the difference between a 150lb. Olympic swimmer and a 130lb. flabby couch potato, nor does it take into account pear vs. apple weight distributions. Still, for people who aren’t particularly muscular, it’s a pretty good indicator.
Then again, so is a mirror. 
Yeah - this is a sticking point with me - you can sometimes look at a person and know that they are not as obese as these sort of charts would try to suggest. I am a good example of this, as is my entire family. We either have dense bones, heavy muscle, or whatever. All I know is that I weigh a lot more than I look, and if one were to judge me by my weight and height alone, they’d think I needed to lose far more weight than I probably really need to lose. (If that makes any sense.)
Or, for instance: I am a little heavier now, but a few years ago I was a size 12, at 5’4". I have a rather balanced “hourglass” figure (no big belly, definite waistline, etc.) I weighed 185. Now, ladies, you all know that while a size 12 is not small, it’s not Circus Lady Fat. The BMI chart tells me that I would be really obese at that weight, yet people looking at me thought I needed to lose perhaps 25 pounds. (I was fat, sure, but not Morbidly Obese!)
I guess my point is that you can’t trust these charts, and you can’t really indicate who is “obese” and who isn’t all the time by looking at impersonal numbers on a page.
From techchick:
Hey, can I call them or what?
As far as I’m concerned, we need a much more reliable way to measure obesity than the BMI. It’s not just the fat that a person carries around, it’s blood pressure, insulin tolerance, cholesterol, arteriosclerosis, and a dozen other factors that are influenced but not necessarily completely governed by weight. Fat doesn’t necessarily mean unhealthy. Fit doesn’t necessarily mean skinny.
It is only the beginning.
Soon, we will be sliding down the slippery slope so fast that it will create a doppler effect for the few observers not on it.
Oh, gimme a break. A bill was proposed by one legislator in one state that, if passed, would authorize some rather modest research concerning a fairly substantial health problem. And a bunch of people start saying, The sky is falling!
If that’s the case, it’s long since fallen, and we’re all crushed by an oppressive, totalitarian regime that would have Joe Stalin spinning in his grave.
Geez, what a bunch of hysterical alarmists. Get a life.
Rulers love men like you. 
This part reminds me of a press release that would be in 1984 or Atlas Shrugged:
This part of the article is not addressed in the Bill:
I assume that whoever wrote this article somehow got this impression from something (maybe an interview or AP report) that we are not seeing here. What tougher measures are they talking about?
If we use the tobacco lawsuits as a guide, I think we can expect:
Lawsuits against companies that make “fatty” food.
Specific Taxes targeted at “Fatty” foods.
(another sin tax?)
Billboards and TV adds letting us know to avoid hamburgers, deserts, fried foods etc…
A larger government that has no real intention of doing anything productive, only in growing larger and larger.
A big payday for the lawyers.
Another notch towards similiar action against automobile producers, bicycle makers, scissor makers and probably needle makers. Anybody who makes any product that hurts ANYONE will be deemed a threat to the “preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.”
Forget the benefit society derives form these products, only the power and revenue that can be LOOTED from them matters to the government.
RTFirefly:
The freedom wackos are marginally useful, I’d let them have their fun. Like any watchdog, they are handy to have around - and if you don’t want to play them with I don’t blame you, but they are still useful.
Still, I think raising a fuss over a bill to spend research dollars on obesity is like barking at the mailman.
Cooper -
Hmmm, does that mean that we hold them to a lower standard than we do most posters, in the fight against ignorance?
Of course, just plain ignoring something like
which takes the article as the reality, and the proposed legislation as the PR, has a lot to be said for it.
Freedom,
Don’t forget the mandatory warning labels on that super-sized Big Mac w/Fries.
“Give a man a fire and he’s warm for a day… Set a man on fire and he’s warm for a lifetime.”
Of course we are useful. Under this system you like so much, there always has to be a group of people that you steal from (us) to support those who want something for nothing (you).
Sure, I should have phrased that sentence differently, but you are not smart enough to past the semantics. The government is busy regulating everything in sight and taking over responsibility for your life, yet you can only laugh at people who feel threatened.
I have to agree with Libertarian:
Rulers love men like you.
freedom wackos? :rolleyes:
< think I will have fettucini alfredo with extra parmesan cheese, anyone else? >
I had to link to this commentary…Lib and Freedom, you’ll love it < grin >
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_excomm/19990920_xex_waging_war_f.shtml