Should we bribe people to be healthy?

Discussion in 'Health and Fitness' started by Mitch, Apr 19, 2012.

  1. Microlamia

    Microlamia Banned Banned

    Not on benefits, but yeesh...I'd rather not be penalized for being too light.

    Why should people have to eat until they make themselves vomit to fit an 'ideal weight' chart? That did nothing for me other than cause severe overheating.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2012
  2. finite monkey

    finite monkey Thought Criminal

    Are you too light?
     
  3. Microlamia

    Microlamia Banned Banned

    Me personally? Yeah the weight-by-height thugs would say so. 5'7, currently 53kg, about 14% fat ish.

    I don't think penalizing people for being light would be fair. Some people are naturally a) very small boned and b) have a fast metabolism. This is where people come in saying well just eat more and you'll overwhelm that metabolism...some people can manage that, yes, but why should someone have to eat themselves sick all the time just to fit an ideal weight chart?
     
  4. Fish Of Doom

    Fish Of Doom Will : Mind : Motion Supporter

    a state of health means different things to different people.

    it is literally impossible to be able to translate that to legal standards that could decide the allocation of benefits and/or penalties for "health".
     
  5. There is a difference between fit and healthy.
    She is fit (to lift heavy weights)
    I don't know if she is healthy (?)

    Then we need to define healthy...


    Osu!
     
  6. Princess Haru

    Princess Haru Valued Member

    http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/07/30/magazine/803BODIES_4.html

    Are you serious! Of these I'd say only the track athlete and cyclist were at a more normal bodyweight, healthy weight and fitness level. This is where even though I'm interested in strength training none of the elite lifters look healthy and would no more be role models than any of the women in fashion houses, 30% bodyfat might be necessary if you lived in Siberia, but otherwise sounds much too high though 4% also sounds very low and how does anyone keep it this low. Don't a lot of athletes die relatively young compared to national life expectancy rates?
     
  7. There are statistical measures that allow insurance companies to estimate the risks of premature death with a high degree of probability.
    I am not sure if this could be made into law, but it certainly narrows things down quite a bit.


    Osu!
     
  8. finite monkey

    finite monkey Thought Criminal

    It would be unfair to discriminate against heavy people and leave the uber skinnies alone. The loss of benefits/skinny tax would be made up on ultra cheap air fares

    We can still try can't we?
     
  9. seiken steve

    seiken steve golden member

    Beep test.

    Anyone bellow a certain score is deemed 'uncapable'

    Brutally harsh but then I've some rather unusual oppinions on the matter.

    Dave tate wrote an interesting bit about how being on top of your game in most elite sports tends to be unhealthy. he's a prime example!
     
  10. seiken steve

    seiken steve golden member

    Ahh didnt see this first time, but yeah, agreed.

    Also lol at the dude with 11 inch arms saying 'my arms grow real quickly'
     
  11. Microlamia

    Microlamia Banned Banned

    I don't think we should penalize anyone!!

    I prefer Steve's idea of the beep test. That would actually test FITNESS, not size. Much fairer, you don't have to be a certain size to pass that.
     
  12. Microlamia

    Microlamia Banned Banned

    Don't know about the death rate, but I'm not a fan of judging 'health' by whether or not you look 'normal'. People's bodies naturally come in all kinds of shapes and sizes so judging people by how close they are to some vague average is fairly senseless.
     
  13. Mangosteen

    Mangosteen Hold strong not

    EXACTLY!
    its why a beep test would be testing fitness not overall health.
    Fitness is specific to a goal, health is overall.
    Michael phelps would be considered unhealthy cos of his diet but fit because it fits his goals.
    No doubt that usain bolt performing the beep test would be terrible.

    Also - taxing diet/weight/BMI/Body fat doesnt take into account the genetic differences.
    Some populations are naturally bigger/taller/stronger/fatter.
    Inuit people have surely differing fat storage and body fat from your englishman. it's down t the genetics and generations of selection pressures.
    It's why many orientals cant process lactose.

    Taxing someone for being bigger naturally is like taxing someone for being black. it's discriminating against something that person cant help unless they go on a special diet and stay 40kg under there natural weight every time they fly.
     
  14. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    I get shin splits when I run for any length if time.
    I mean...I'm also unfit but that's not the point dammit. :)
     
  15. Fish Of Doom

    Fish Of Doom Will : Mind : Motion Supporter

    you guys do realize a lot of people are physiologically incapable of safely participating in fitness activities? how are you going to account for the people who inevitably get injured and become crippled for life, or who die during your mandatory fitness tests that serve no purpose other than to legally discriminate them if they are not being physically optimal? what about those who are PHYSICALLY incapable of doing it? i'm not quite sure quadraplegics and amputees without access to technological facilitators like pistorius' prostheses would be very happy about it (and how would you account for increases in performance in the cases where such technological facilitators permit them?).

    yes, it would be cool if everyone were healthy or fit, but the concept is horribly impractical in terms of application.
     
  16. You are entirely correct in your "moral" standing FoD.
    However, it is my contention that it is a mistake to base our reasoning on exceptions; exceptions would have to be accounted for, but shall not dictate the way we think.
    - A vast majority of people have the capacity (if not the ability) to have and maintain a healthy body - over 95%?
    - The vast majority of those that did not retain or develop the ability did it because of poor choices of lifestyle (at least in the first world)
    - The fact that it would be "impractical" to implement, should not stand in the way of proper analysis and understanding.


    Then, we should choose with discrimination who we are listening to for health advice:
    [​IMG]


    osu!
     
  17. Gary

    Gary Vs The Irresistible Farce Supporter

    However you look at it, it's always going to be better making exercise and good dietary choices cheaper and more available than any kind of personal financial remuneration.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2012
  18. Fish Of Doom

    Fish Of Doom Will : Mind : Motion Supporter

    by that logic, the death penalty should be implemented even with the existence of exceptions that make it impractical to implement without errors ;)

    i am firmly of the opinion that using the law to regulate this is a bad idea. ingrain it in culture instead, along with adequate education in order to foster understanding of exercise, its benefits and the disadvantages of not doing it. counter-culture elements will always exist, and so even in such a case there will always be voluntarily unfit people, but it will be their choice, anyway.
     
  19. finite monkey

    finite monkey Thought Criminal

    Its all about personal choice/ rights and responsabilitys

    We all have the right to choose to comfort eat and become a burden on society, but who pays for it all?

    Let those who choose an un healthy lifestyle pay thier way, I dont want to carry someone elses gut around

    GOVT have to lead the way, because too many people can't think for themselves or are adicted
     
  20. I'd say rights and duties!


    Osu!
     

Share This Page