PDA

View Full Version : We Got It Backwards On Healthcare Costs Who Really Cost Us $$$$$%%



Disco Stu
02-02-2013, 10:18 AM
I often hear the argument of poor choices and the associated healthcare costs

First it was cigarettes and the tobacco companies Now we are targeting soft drinks and restaurant chains

But who REALLY COSTS lots of money well it's you healthy people who live long into old age

Generally Smokers and Fat people shave about 25 years off their lifespans sure they got problems but they don't live long enough to have ongoing acute problems or on to need 5-10 years of nursing home care before they die

You healthy people blame fast food and cigarettes but infact it's YOU HEALTHY PEOPLE who will live long enough to really cost us money

Agree or disagree

Let's discuss

Deadwood
02-02-2013, 10:59 AM
I often hear the argument of poor choices and the associated healthcare costs

First it was cigarettes and the tobacco companies Now we are targeting soft drinks and restaurant chains

But who REALLY COSTS lots of money well it's you healthy people who live long into old age

Generally Smokers and Fat people shave about 25 years off their lifespans sure they got problems but they don't live long enough to have ongoing acute problems or on to need 5-10 years of nursing home care before they die

You healthy people blame fast food and cigarettes but infact it's YOU HEALTHY PEOPLE who will live long enough to really cost us money

Agree or disagree

Let's discuss



Discuss? Let's do. But, put some facts in the OP instead of a collected opinions....

Then compare the nation's soft drink consumption, sugar, fast food, and the for profit system and see what you get.

There is a reason the average American pre teen is 30 lbs over weight, lagging in school, and gas a life expectancy 2.3 year less than a year.

This things are all available.

But without the data to back it up, it's wall paper.

Good topic though, now try Google

Peter1469
02-02-2013, 11:34 AM
I take the premise of the OP to be:

Those with poor lifestyle choices die early, and end up costing society less in health care costs and retirement costs.

If so, that may very well be true. In college I used to joke: save social security- smoke.

lynn
02-02-2013, 12:10 PM
I do agree with the OP that it is those lifestyles bad choices will prevent them from living to retirement age to collect S.S. I have a niece who at age 32 died of a heart attack because she ate junk food all of her life. There has been articles that state that the current generations will not live as long as the older generations due to changes in how young children are being raised on fast food and little physical activity.

The insurance companies want all of us healthy so we rarely require healthcare while our government wants us all to die before we reach 65 to collect benefits. The Affordable Care Act that insists it wants Americans to have preventative care in hopes of better lifestyles may create an unsustainable cost after most manage to live beyond 65 on our government.

As it is right now those Americans that are 65 and older did live a healthy lifestyle are constantly living in fear that social security is going to be taken away from them. Given these two choices of living a healthy or unhealthy lifestyle leaves me to believe that an unhealthy one is better so I can die sooner in old age. What I fear most is not being physically able to support myself in old age as this would be a slow death.

Deadwood
02-02-2013, 12:21 PM
I take the premise of the OP to be:

Those with poor lifestyle choices die early, and end up costing society less in health care costs and retirement costs.

If so, that may very well be true. In college I used to joke: save social security- smoke.




It ignores so may other factors. One, people who live longer than the average life expectancy tend to cost the system less as they don't generally develop diseases especailly those associated with poor lifestyle.

ANd, it does not include the cost of smoking cessation medications, not the companion diseases associated with smoking, respiratory and cardiac. Nor does the OP take into account the cost of keeping these people alive with everything from inhaler's, oxygen bottles, open heart surgery, lung transplants and all that.

There there are the 1,400 diseases associated with obesity, including heart disease, liver disease, hip replacements, and, or course, the disease we will ALL get if we live long enough, diabetes and all the problems and check ups and eye surgery and amputations associated with that.

Now, compare the cost of providing meds, the accessories so they can, care givers and all the need to see a doctor for a 65 year old obese, chain smoker and the cost of a healthy 65 year old no meds, providing for himself and paying taxes, buying presents for his kids and grandkids.

The thought that being healthy and living longer being a drain on society is a little too grotesque and gruesomely "Eugenics" for my liking.

It makes more sense to try to prevent the problem.

Adelaide
02-02-2013, 01:47 PM
Unhealthy people (in terms of lifestyle) are the largest stressor on any healthcare system; the diseases and disorders associated with poor health are often chronic and require long-term treatment and monitoring which costs an insane amount of money. Given how many people smoke, eat terribly/are obese, abuse substances, etc., you're looking at a very large portion of the population that is using a mass amount of resources and money.

lynn
02-02-2013, 02:05 PM
And on the other end of the coin there are just as many people that develop lung disease that have never smoked nor been around second hand smoke. There are many people who had a active healthy lifestyle but still dropped dead of a heart attack. The myth that diabetes only affects obese people is a misconception since there are just as many thin people that develop diabetes. Our society cannot seem to eliminate sugar from many of our food products in addition to all those additives that can effect our DNA to cause mutations that develop diseases.

The big pharm industry is totally responsible for pushing meds and brainwashing society that convinces them they need it to live. The insurance industry wants to find any excuse to raise premiums in the name of profit so they will find anything that we do in lifestyle habits to apply cause of common diseases. Both large empires do not want science to find the cure for anything since it would eliminate the need for meds or health insurance.

Lastly we have our government that would like nothing more then to have the entire population of people 65 and older to die all at once so they don't have to repay the trust funds that they stole and were built off the hardworking backs of American citizens since it was created.

The reality is our society needs people that have unhealthy habits for it works to support the healthcare profession that has a high number of the employed in this country. Our government needs the majority of the population to die before 65 because they need the money from the payroll taxes of all these individuals to sustain government operations. The corporations that sell all of these unhealthy food products needs the unhealthy population to stay in business and provide employment to thousands in this country.

All of these unhealthy issues have been interwoven into society that many businesses are totally dependent on that population to make a living so when you state prevention as the solution, it ends up creating a domino effect of new problems for society to survive.

lynn
02-02-2013, 02:11 PM
People with these chronic conditions consist of 1% of the population and it the health insurance companies that make it seem that is costing healthcare to rise when it is purely greed from the insurance companies that don't want to pay on any claims.

Disco Stu
02-02-2013, 02:18 PM
Unhealthy people (in terms of lifestyle) are the largest stressor on any healthcare system; the diseases and disorders associated with poor health are often chronic and require long-term treatment and monitoring which costs an insane amount of money. Given how many people smoke, eat terribly/are obese, abuse substances, etc., you're looking at a very large portion of the population that is using a mass amount of resources and money.

I never stated that they don't cost us money I'M just saying they die much sooner therefore it's a cost savings in the long run

Take my mom and dad

My father was 59 he smoked two packs aday he loved pizza Chinese buffets and Fried chicken and he drank everynight he had 2 survived the first two heart attacks but died the third he also had pulmonary disease from cigarettes and factory fumes and abunch of other problems he spent the last 3/4 years of his life on disability half bed ridden

My mother is 75 now and she lived much healthier she never smoked she likes wine but just afew glasses and is somewhat of a vegetarian but she has eyes problems a hip replacement surgery she's diabetic and is on a host of blood pressure and cholesterol medications and a host of other problems n hospital visits I can't remember

My mom is still living and no signs of going anytime soom

See what I mean

Mister D
02-02-2013, 02:33 PM
Unhealthy people (in terms of lifestyle) are the largest stressor on any healthcare system; the diseases and disorders associated with poor health are often chronic and require long-term treatment and monitoring which costs an insane amount of money. Given how many people smoke, eat terribly/are obese, abuse substances, etc., you're looking at a very large portion of the population that is using a mass amount of resources and money.

That's obvious but I suppose some people will go to any length to justify their bad habits.

lynn
04-04-2013, 08:47 AM
According to the hospital statistics the most popular surgery for the elderly are knee and hip replacements. I guess all that good exercise comes at a price too.

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 08:48 AM
According to the hospital statistics the most popular surgery for the elderly are knee and hip replacements. I guess all that good exercise comes at a price too.

Aren't most knee and hip problems in the elderly caused by degenerative diseases?

junie
04-04-2013, 09:01 AM
I often hear the argument of poor choices and the associated healthcare costs

First it was cigarettes and the tobacco companies Now we are targeting soft drinks and restaurant chains

But who REALLY COSTS lots of money well it's you healthy people who live long into old age

Generally Smokers and Fat people shave about 25 years off their lifespans sure they got problems but they don't live long enough to have ongoing acute problems or on to need 5-10 years of nursing home care before they die

You healthy people blame fast food and cigarettes but infact it's YOU HEALTHY PEOPLE who will live long enough to really cost us money

Agree or disagree

Let's discuss



how do healthy elderly cost the system more if they are not incurring any actual cost of care???

junie
04-04-2013, 09:16 AM
Using administrative claims from 95 managed care health plans obtained through a commercial database, the investigators retrospectively examined data for patients with at least 2 diagnoses of type 2 diabetes during the study period (July 2005-June 2010). The date of the first diagnosis defined the index date. Patients eligible for inclusion in the study also were required to have at least 1 year of continuous plan enrollment post-index date.


Patients were then grouped into high-cost patients (n=172,004) and not high-cost patients (n=1,548,037). All-cause healthcare utilization total costs for each cohort were calculated based on aggregate costs over a 1-year follow-up period for inpatient, skilled nursing facility, emergency department, outpatient hospital, office visits, laboratory, other outpatient care, and pharmacy services, and the total for all of these services. Diabetes-related healthcare utilization and costs included all inpatient visits with a primary discharge diagnosis of diabetes, outpatient and laboratory services with a primary or secondary diagnosis of diabetes, and medications specific to treating diabetes.


Overall, the high-cost and not high-cost patients were comparable in age, sex, geographical region, type of health plan, and payer distribution. Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score was significantly higher in the high-cost patients compared with the not high-cost patients, and high-cost patients were significantly more likely to have a diagnosis of renal impairment, obesity, and hypertension. Also, high-cost patients were significantly more likely to receive insulin.


During the 1-year of follow-up, the study found that all-cause related healthcare costs and diabetes-related healthcare costs were on average $50,000 and $4014, respectively, higher for the high-cost patients compared with the not high-cost patients. Nearly 75% (n=127,553) of high-cost patients had at least 1 inpatient stay compared with 11% (n=166,729) of not high-cost patients.
When looking at patient factors that accounted for patients being identified as a high-cost patient, CCI score of >2 was the strongest predictor, followed by a diagnosis of obesity, renal impairment, and insulin use.


Based on the results of the study, the investigators say that “further research is needed to explore potential interventions to reduce the likelihood that a patient becomes high cost.”

http://www.firstreportnow.com/articles/high-cost-patients-diabetes-incur-higher-annual-healthcare-costs

Cigar
04-04-2013, 09:18 AM
I often hear the argument of poor choices and the associated healthcare costs

First it was cigarettes and the tobacco companies Now we are targeting soft drinks and restaurant chains

But who REALLY COSTS lots of money well it's you healthy people who live long into old age

Generally Smokers and Fat people shave about 25 years off their lifespans sure they got problems but they don't live long enough to have ongoing acute problems or on to need 5-10 years of nursing home care before they die

You healthy people blame fast food and cigarettes but infact it's YOU HEALTHY PEOPLE who will live long enough to really cost us money

Agree or disagree

Let's discuss

If that's true ... then I hope I cost Millions. :)

junie
04-04-2013, 09:45 AM
If that's true ... then I hope I cost Millions. :)




lol my grandmother born in 1913 lived to be 95 and had never been to the doctor since the day she had last given birth in the 1940s. all the insurance premiums she ever paid and all the social security benefits she had never tapped into finally got utilized but only in her final year... i'd say "the system" definitely gained something by virtue of her decades of good health.

"the system" is such a racket right now as there is way too much money wasted on all sorts of administrative costs. "insurance" was supposed to be for the purpose of protecting us from possibly incurring high cost incidents. now probably the high cost of insurance itself is what's causing people to have strokes! lol

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 09:52 AM
Insurance is supposed to cover unforeseen costs and catastrophic costs. Maintenance plans or cash should pay for routine care.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 11:12 AM
Discuss? Let's do. But, put some facts in the OP instead of a collected opinions....

Then compare the nation's soft drink consumption, sugar, fast food, and the for profit system and see what you get.

There is a reason the average American pre teen is 30 lbs over weight, lagging in school, and gas a life expectancy 2.3 year less than a year.

This things are all available.

But without the data to back it up, it's wall paper.

Good topic though, now try Google



Obesity and obesity related disorders broke the health care system. Factor out the morbidly obese, and the rest of of are doing ok, except the fatties are breaking our insurance companies. Not corporate greed but personal gluttony to blame.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 11:14 AM
According to the hospital statistics the most popular surgery for the elderly are knee and hip replacements. I guess all that good exercise comes at a price too.



Packing around an extra 75-100% of healthy body weight wrecks ankles, knees and hips, as well as spine.

Much harder on a body than reasonable exercise, and much harder on the health care system.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 11:20 AM
lol my grandmother born in 1913 lived to be 95 and had never been to the doctor since the day she had last given birth in the 1940s. all the insurance premiums she ever paid and all the social security benefits she had never tapped into finally got utilized but only in her final year... i'd say "the system" definitely gained something by virtue of her decades of good health.

"the system" is such a racket right now as there is way too much money wasted on all sorts of administrative costs. "insurance" was supposed to be for the purpose of protecting us from possibly incurring high cost incidents. now probably the high cost of insurance itself is what's causing people to have strokes! lol


When government mandates that people who have never had insurance, and have waited until they are sick to get it, can enter into an insurance pool funded by people who have been paying in regularly over long careers, it has ceased to be an insurance pool, it is a means of welfare, and an act of theft.

nic34
04-04-2013, 11:24 AM
Obesity and obesity related disorders broke the health care system. Factor out the morbidly obese, and the rest of of are doing ok, except the fatties are breaking our insurance companies. Not corporate greed but personal gluttony to blame.

Many people are obese by not of their own doing. And poverty makes it difficult to get proper nutrition.

Junk food is easier and cheaper to buy and corporate greed is indeed partly responsible.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 11:26 AM
Many people are obese by not of their own doing. And poverty makes it difficult to get proper nutrition.

Junk food is easier and cheaper to buy and corporate greed is indeed partly responsible.

The vast majority of fatties are fat because of their own ignorance and lack of self-control.

nic34
04-04-2013, 11:34 AM
The vast majority of fatties are fat because of their own ignorance and lack of self-control.

If you say so. That trait seems to mostly be in "red states":

2226


http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/obesity/obesity-youth.htm

Mister D
04-04-2013, 11:36 AM
If you say so. That trait seems to mostly be in "red states":

2226


http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/obesity/obesity-youth.htm

No surprise there. Blacks and browns are the fattest populations in the US.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 11:36 AM
Speaking of red, Injuns are pretty fat too.

Chris
04-04-2013, 11:37 AM
Red states?

http://i.snag.gy/C1fjM.jpg

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 11:38 AM
Many people are obese by not of their own doing. And poverty makes it difficult to get proper nutrition.

Junk food is easier and cheaper to buy and corporate greed is indeed partly responsible.



Junk food is not cheaper though it may be easier.

Food stamps or whatever they are called these days, are a two way welfare program, from the Dept. of Ag to the poor, and from the Dept. of Ag to the huge multi-national agricorporations.

They have resulted in generations of people that have no incentive to eat right.

They can be used almost anywhere now, for the trashiest junk food, which is just wrong.

These funds should only be used on whole grains and flours, basics like milk, eggs, cheese, fresh meat, not processed, etc.

In other words, the funds should go so that people can prepare freshly cooked food.

But of course, generational dependence has produced a nation of single moms that cannot provide a stable home in which the kids get their main meals at home, excluding school time, of course.

BTW, when a kid is on food stamps, AND gets free breakfast and lunch at school(180daysx2=360 extra meals a year) is the government complicit in that child's obesity?

Broader question, if a family turns to government for food and medical assistance, at some point does the government have the right to intervene?

Mister D
04-04-2013, 11:39 AM
Junk food is not cheaper though it may be easier.

Food stamps or whatever they are called these days, are a two way welfare program, from the Dept. of Ag to the poor, and from the Dept. of Ag to the huge multi-national agricorporations.

They have resulted in generations of people that have no incentive to eat right.

They can be used almost anywhere now, for the trashiest junk food, which is just wrong.

These funds should only be used on whole grains and flours, basics like milk, eggs, cheese, fresh meat, not processed, etc.

In other words, the funds should go so that people can prepare freshly cooked food.

But of course, generational dependence has produced a nation of single moms that cannot provide a stable home in which the kids get their main meals at home, excluding school time, of course.

BTW, when a kid is on food stamps, AND gets free breakfast and lunch at school(180daysx2=360 extra meals a year) is the government complicit in that child's obesity?

Broader question, if a family turns to government for food and medical assistance, at some point does the government have the right to intervene?

C'mon! It's all because the coporate bogeyman and George Bush!

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 11:44 AM
C'mon! It's all because the coporate bogeyman and George Bush!



Bush behind every bush; the party line.

Unemployment unexpectedly higher than predicted yesterday, because Bush had been hoarding his money.

Gets old.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 11:52 AM
Many people are obese by not of their own doing. And poverty makes it difficult to get proper nutrition.

Junk food is easier and cheaper to buy and corporate greed is indeed partly responsible.




Poverty is a state of mind, not a permanent condition.

I know many old people, raised in poverty, who never even knew they were poor.

Today, their grandchildren and great granchildren are on welfare and having scads of kids out of wedlock.

Poverty programs have had the unintended consequence of de-stigmatizing behavior(having children you cannot or will not properly provide for) that society once limited through a set of generally accepted principles(you work to feed your own, you marry the mother of your children, preferably before they are concieved) and replaced it with a welfare system that will actually support a shiftless lifestyle pretty well if you milk it for all it is worth.

Are tens of millions of truly needy and disabled people get basic assistance no humane person could oppose? Of course, as it should be.

Have millions more taken advantage, and chosen to milk and abuse the system, and failed to take advantage of free basic education to escape poverty? In far too many cases, that is the case.

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 11:56 AM
It is easy and cheap to make good nutritious meals: soups, stews, chili, etc. People get junk food for convenience. I could make a stew that would feed a family of four for two meals for cheaper than taking them to McDonalds for one crappy meal.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 12:03 PM
It is easy and cheap to make good nutritious meals: soups, stews, chili, etc. People get junk food for convenience. I could make a stew that would feed a family of four for two meals for cheaper than taking them to McDonalds for one crappy meal.


Corn meal, whole grain flours, a variety of peas and beans provided in bulk, along with a card system limited to basic spices, dairy goods, fresh vegetables and meats, fish, poulty, etc, who be much more healthy.

You cannot give irresponsbile people who cannot care for their own without government assistance free run of groceries, delis, fast food joints etc and expect them to eat responsibly, and we cannot pay for their obesity and obesity related disorders.

Something has to give.

Time to make being fat illegal.

Put 'em to work for the county til they shape up.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:04 PM
Right. Most of this is really just a matter of education.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:04 PM
And simply the will to eat properly.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 12:13 PM
Right. Most of this is really just a matter of education.


We should round 'em up, re-educate them correctly.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 12:15 PM
And simply the will to eat properly.

Since we are going to big, intrusive government anyway, time to put any fatty on government assistance on a strictly monitored diet.

If government has to feed you, and you can't muster the will to eat a properly planned government diet, and that only, then maybe fat camp and an electricity generating treadmill is in order.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:23 PM
We should round 'em up, re-educate them correctly.

I'd like to think they could learn to read a nutrition label on their own but apparently they can't.

nic34
04-04-2013, 12:23 PM
All that credible evidence, and information... why do we need sources with all these experts right here on tPF!


Here's some actual info with a source:

The primary reason that lower-income people are more overweight is because the unhealthiest and most fattening foods are the cheapest. If you were broke and had just three dollars to spend on food today, would you buy a head of broccoli or a Super Value Meal with French fries, a cheeseburger and a Coke?

Because you’re reading this publication, you might choose the former. But for most people who have very little to spend on food, the choice is clear.
And make no mistake. This does not represent a failure of the capitalist free-market system. Modern agri-business and government food policy represents a perverted version of capitalism – crony capitalism – where those with the most money and the most powerful friends in government control the markets.

What they have done is use your tax dollars to subsidize certain commodity crops (at the expense of others) to ensure that the cost of oils, sugar and grains stay artificially low. With low input costs, food manufacturers can turn a tidy profit. The end result is that processed foods – even though they require more technology, more labor and more marketing to produce and sell – are cheaper to the consumer than real, whole foods.

Consider that between 1985 and 2000, the inflation-adjusted prices of fruits and vegetables increased by an average of 40%. During the same period of time the real price of soft drinks fell by almost 25%.

http://institutefornaturalhealing.com/2011/04/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/

Let the insults fly now....

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:28 PM
All that credible evidence, and information... why do we need sources with all these experts right here on tPF!


Here's some actual info with a source:

The primary reason that lower-income people are more overweight is because the unhealthiest and most fattening foods are the cheapest. If you were broke and had just three dollars to spend on food today, would you buy a head of broccoli or a Super Value Meal with French fries, a cheeseburger and a Coke?

Because you’re reading this publication, you might choose the former. But for most people who have very little to spend on food, the choice is clear.
And make no mistake. This does not represent a failure of the capitalist free-market system. Modern agri-business and government food policy represents a perverted version of capitalism – crony capitalism – where those with the most money and the most powerful friends in government control the markets.

What they have done is use your tax dollars to subsidize certain commodity crops (at the expense of others) to ensure that the cost of oils, sugar and grains stay artificially low. With low input costs, food manufacturers can turn a tidy profit. The end result is that processed foods – even though they require more technology, more labor and more marketing to produce and sell – are cheaper to the consumer than real, whole foods.

Consider that between 1985 and 2000, the inflation-adjusted prices of fruits and vegetables increased by an average of 40%. During the same period of time the real price of soft drinks fell by almost 25%.

http://institutefornaturalhealing.com/2011/04/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/

Let the insults fly now....

Yeah, legume prcies have soared. :laugh: Brown rice hit an all time high!

To answer the moron's question: I'd buy a pound beans or lentils and a piece of fat. It would feed me for days and it would be very healthy.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 12:29 PM
Yeah, legume prcies have soared. :laugh: Brown rice hit an all time high!

To answer the moron's question: I'd buy a pound beans or lentils and a piece of fat. It would feed me for days and it would be very healthy.



Rice, beans, fatback all at record highs.

One of the hidden, but intended, consequences of massive food stamp program.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:30 PM
OhBTW, when your source is trying to sell you something watch out.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:31 PM
Rice, beans, fatback all at record highs.

One of the hidden, but intended, consequences of massive food stamp program.

I can get a pound of beans for $1.25 tops.

nic34
04-04-2013, 12:31 PM
Simple answers from the simple-minded. As usual.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:31 PM
Simple answers from the simple-minded. As usual.

Nutrition and proper eating isn't rocket science, nic. :smiley:

Cigar
04-04-2013, 12:34 PM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4s5pmFL_ZlQ/SGfsi6j_erI/AAAAAAAAA2c/0ipvHs75WDE/s320/WHINING+www.motivationalpostersonline.blogspot.com +demotivational+posters+motivational+poster+funny. jpg#whining%20demotivate

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 12:34 PM
All that credible evidence, and information... why do we need sources with all these experts right here on tPF!


Here's some actual info with a source:

The primary reason that lower-income people are more overweight is because the unhealthiest and most fattening foods are the cheapest. If you were broke and had just three dollars to spend on food today, would you buy a head of broccoli or a Super Value Meal with French fries, a cheeseburger and a Coke?

Because you’re reading this publication, you might choose the former. But for most people who have very little to spend on food, the choice is clear.
And make no mistake. This does not represent a failure of the capitalist free-market system. Modern agri-business and government food policy represents a perverted version of capitalism – crony capitalism – where those with the most money and the most powerful friends in government control the markets.

What they have done is use your tax dollars to subsidize certain commodity crops (at the expense of others) to ensure that the cost of oils, sugar and grains stay artificially low. With low input costs, food manufacturers can turn a tidy profit. The end result is that processed foods – even though they require more technology, more labor and more marketing to produce and sell – are cheaper to the consumer than real, whole foods.

Consider that between 1985 and 2000, the inflation-adjusted prices of fruits and vegetables increased by an average of 40%. During the same period of time the real price of soft drinks fell by almost 25%.

http://institutefornaturalhealing.com/2011/04/the-economics-of-obesity-why-are-poor-people-fat/

Let the insults fly now....


Your super-value meal is only going to cover one meal.

4 cups, beef (or other) stock; carrots; potatoes; onions; garlic- and you have several meals for probably $10 or less. But of course you have to cook it.

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 12:35 PM
Nutrition and proper eating isn't rocket science, nic. :smiley:


Anything and everything is rocket science to a dumbed down society that needs government to look after their interests in anything and everything.

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 12:37 PM
Anything and everything is rocket science to a dumbed down society that needs government to look after their interests in anything and everything.

If the government gives you money for food, the government should force proper nutrition on you. Or cut you off.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 12:39 PM
If the government gives you money for food, the government should force proper nutrition on you. Or cut you off.

Agreed 100%

Greenridgeman
04-04-2013, 12:39 PM
If the government gives you money for food, the government should force proper nutrition on you. Or cut you off.


Agreed.

And if they cover your healthcare because you didn't(notice, how I worded that)they should be able to tell you how to eat.

Common
04-04-2013, 01:07 PM
If the government gives you money for food, the government should force proper nutrition on you. Or cut you off.

I absolutely agree there should be restrictions on what you can buy with food stamps

Mister D
04-04-2013, 01:09 PM
I absolutely agree there should be restrictions on what you can buy with food stamps

Right. It only makes sense.

Common
04-04-2013, 01:13 PM
If I may refer back to Disco Stu's original post. I being older than many on here have some personal input.
I never went to the Dr except for injuries until I was over 50 yrs old. I never got sick enough to need a dr. If I got a virus I rode it out, cold, I rode it out. People running to the Dr with sniffles is killing us.
Older people need more medicine and health care. Your body doesnt do what its told after 55 or so. I would say Yes to older people living longer cost more in the long run. Eventually ALL of us die from something. If its not heart disease, then when your in your 80s or 90s kidney failure, liver disease, cancer and what was once the biggest cause of death of human beings pnuemonia.
My dad never went to the dr, combat disabled vet never went to the VA "until" he hit 70 or so, from age 70 until he passed away at 87 he cost a virtual fortune in health care costs.
Disco Stu might be spot on, but thats an uneducated statement just my opinion

Mister D
04-04-2013, 01:14 PM
I am the same way. I ride illnesses out. I've been to the doc once in the last 10 years. That was for gout.

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 02:07 PM
It takes a lot for me to go to a doc. I have only seen my primary care doc 2 times in the last several years. I have seen other specialists when hounded to do so.

lynn
04-04-2013, 07:53 PM
Don't worry those fatties will not live past 65 to collect social security. Have you ever seen a real old person that was fat? I haven't! Older people that have to have knee replacement or hips is degenerative but the reason it becomes degenerative is due to how much you used it in your life time. It just like any injury you sustained in your younger years you will most likely get arthritis later on in that area of where you sustained past injuries.

The fact is we all will die and our bodies do wear out as we age whether it be genetics, lifestyle or just plain bad luck at some point we are going to cost the health system at some later point in our lives. My motto is to stay away from hospitals and doctors for as long as possible so I don't wind up on prescriptions drugs for the rest of my life.

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 07:54 PM
Don't worry those fatties will not live past 65 to collect social security. Have you ever seen a real old person that was fat? I haven't! Older people that have to have knee replacement or hips is degenerative but the reason it becomes degenerative is due to how much you used it in your life time. It just like any injury you sustained in your younger years you will most likely get arthritis later on in that area of where you sustained past injuries.

The fact is we all will die and our bodies do wear out as we age whether it be genetics, lifestyle or just plain bad luck at some point we are going to cost the health system at some later point in our lives. My motto is to stay away from hospitals and doctors for as long as possible so I don't wind up on prescriptions drugs for the rest of my life.

Proper exercise will strengthen your bones, ligaments, and body over all. Of course, lots of people do it wrong and injure themselves.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 07:57 PM
On that note, I was somewhat surprised to learn that moderate pounding exercises (e.g. running) actually strengthens bones and ligaments.

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 08:25 PM
On that note, I was somewhat surprised to learn that moderate pounding exercises (e.g. running) actually strengthens bones and ligaments.

Moderate. Not extreme. Of course some people can handle it. It is a case of use it or lose it.

Mister D
04-04-2013, 08:33 PM
Moderate is the key term.

Peter1469
04-04-2013, 08:39 PM
I agree. Most people can't tolerate the extreme athletics. The ones who can get sponsors and get paid to work out, eat, and sleep all day.