i am SHOCKED!

[rainbabies]

shocked i say!!

yeah...not. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27697364/?GT1=43001

i saw on the local news here, last week, that the people of huntington wv are upset about the stereotypes mentioned in the autors findings. toothless, fat, uneducated. um...well, the truth hurts!! okay, okay not everyone is like that here....but it's 98% acurate. :huh:

i also find it interesting that the state we live in for residency has the most fat asses, and my home state is the healthiest. LOL!!






(yes i am in a rotten mood.)

Re: i am SHOCKED!

I don't know anything about where the fattest people in the US are, but your post made me crack up!!! I REALLY needed that this morning so thanks!

As a side note, we have a ton of obese people here....I was shocked when we got back from Oz (we lived in a very healthy crunchy posh area there) at just how gigantic everyone in our hometown was!!! I had also forgotten how ginormous all of the portions in NA were....

[migirl]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

I was born in Huntington, WV...

Re: i am SHOCKED!

What is super scary about this is the stats change in the last 20 years. In my psych class we talked about motivation to eat, and he showed us the states reporting over the last 20 years:




The question to the class was, "Is obesity an epidemic in the United States?"

- yes

Re: i am SHOCKED!

Please note on the above there isn't a category over BMI over 30% - now there is, with a shocking percentage within that category.

Re: i am SHOCKED!

Wow, that's scary! I'm sure we would look the same...going to go find out now!

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

I would have thought the fattest city would have been in Texas or Mississippi.

I would not have been surprised if it was St. Louis.

[houseelf]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

Here's a controversial solution:

(Fox news)

Alabama is rolling out a creative but controversial program that will subject its 37,527 state employees to possibly humiliating at-work weigh-ins and fat tests. If they tip the scales, they'll be given a choice: slim down or pay up.

The state is trying to solve two of its biggest problems — health insurance costs and obesity — in one fell swoop.

Beginning in 2010, Alabama, which has the second highest obesity rate in the country, will start charging all of its employees an extra $25 per month for health insurance. (Currently, single workers pay nothing; family plans cost $180 a month.)

But there's a way to avoid the fee: Get a check-up at an in-office "wellness center," where nurses will check for diabetes and hypertension and measure blood pressure, cholesterol, glucose levels and Body Mass Index (BMI).

The idea is to encourage employees to act responsibly, lose weight and lower their health care needs. But critics say it will humiliate and stigmatize obese employees and amounts to nothing short of a "fat tax."

A BMI test uses height and weight measurements to calculate the percentage of body fat in adult males and females. Alabama is using a BMI threshold of 35 — 30 is considered obese, by most medical standards — to determine who doesn't have to pay the automatic $25 deduction.

Health practitioners often factor in skinfold (fat) and waist circumference measurements while calculating a patient's BMI.

Does Alabama think you're fat? Take this humiliation-free BMI test online.

If you're deemed fit, you're exempt. But if you flunk the BMI exam, it's shape up or pay up. Obese workers will be required to see a doctor and will have to show proof of their attempt to lose weight.

The program is optional ... sort of. If you don't take the tests, you'll have to pay the $25 charge.

The $25-per-month fee is not the only way Alabama hopes to discourage bad health decisions by state employees, said the program's creator, William Ashmore, executive director of the Alabama State Employees' Insurance Board. Alabama already charges smokers a monthly $25 insurance fee.

"There are folks walking around with diabetes and hypertension that don't even know it, and it's just a matter of time before something catastrophic happens to them," Ashmore said. "If we can get people to manage their health, we'll have healthier employees and less healthcare costs."

He said employees with a BMI of 35 or higher cost the state 40 percent more than those with a BMI under 35, and the program will help in many ways. "This is not a fat tax," Ashmore said. "It's not punitive."

But that's exactly what critics are calling it: a punitive "fat tax" designed to stigmatize the obese by inappropriately — and possibly illegally — bringing weight into the workplace.

"This is a dreadful, dreadful policy," said Judith S. Stern, an obesity expert and nutrition professor at University of California at Davis. "Overweight and obese people, especially women, feel that their weight is private, and being weighed at work is like having a prostate exam in the hall. It's not appropriate."

Critics also say Alabama's program borders on discrimination by using obesity, which is medically categorized as a disease, as its benchmark.

"I think it discriminates against people with a disease — obesity is a disease," Stern said. "Would you charge more money if they had breast cancer?"

Alabama's program is a dangerous step on a very slippery slope, says Mark V. Pauly, professor of health care systems at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business. "The unanswered question is, 'How much you want to do this?'" he said. "If you got lung cancer because you smoked, do we charge you a penalty there? What about couch potatoes? Do we put all the employees on treadmills?"

Medical and social considerations aside, other critics say it's just not going to work. "There's the thought that obese people are weak-willed, and if we charge them more they won't be as fat," Stern said. "This assumes they have control over what's involved, and often they don't."

And there's the cost factor. In its efforts to reduce heath care costs Alabama will spend an extra $1.6 million for health screenings and programs next year.

"From the viewpoint of the employer who provides health care and pension, this kind of cancels out," Pauly said. "What you lost on health care you get back in pension plan, because now these people are living longer."

Whatever the plan, a company's success in lowering health care costs and curbing obesity could depend entirely on how it's framed. Rewards tend to work better than punishment.

"It's possible to set these things up to look like more like carrots than sticks," Pauly said. "And people tend to respond better to carrots."

Alabama isn't alone in its struggle to cut costs and curb obesity. Two-thirds of American adults are overweight or obese, according to a recent report from Trust for America's Health, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C.

Clarian Health Partners, a hospital chain in Indiana, has taken a different approach. In 2009, they will start deducting money from the paychecks of workers who do not meet — and don't show efforts to meet — various health criteria. Smoking without trying to quit will cost $5; high glucose, high blood pressure and high cholesterol levels will cost $5 each; a high Body Mass Index will cost $10.

This is also happening abroad. Japan is monitoring the waist measurements of its policyholders, according to official government websites. Citizens receive jury duty-like summonses to appear for measurements — and if they're too fat, their employer will be slapped with a hefty fine. The maximum waist size allowed for men is 33.5 inches and 35.4 inches for women.

It's unlikely that Japan's program will catch on stateside, but that doesn't mean Americans are off the hook. Alabama's so-called "fat tax" could just be the beginning of a trend.

"A lot of employers are talking about this," Pauly said. "There's the feeling that you have to do something. What you do then is a matter of design and discretion."

As for Alabama, Ashmore is sure that those who have their doubts will soon come around. He encourages workers to swing by his Montgomery office to pick up pamphlets about the program and to learn more about reducing their Body Mass Index.

But to get to his second-floor office they'll first have to make it past the Chick-Fil-A downstairs (average meal: 1,000 calories).

Kelly

[SuzySunshine]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

DH's hospital, whom we get our insurance through, has started a program which gives you incentives to stop smoking and to work out. I think that is more of the way to go but at the same time there are people out there who wouldn't respond to that and would need to be forced.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

Wow...interesting article, Kelly. Obviously, obesity is a problem, but I don't know that punitive measures are the way to go. I can certainly understand having to pay more in terms of a medical deductible. Someone can be obese and healthier than someone thin though too. My dh is very thin. He can eat whatever he wants (including huge quantities of chocolate nightly while he lays in bed and watches tv), but he doesn't exercise at all. I would argue that his sedentary lifestyle puts him at risk.

I am obese, but I walk every day....I'm not arguing that I'm healthier than he is, but my blood pressure <for example> is much lower than his.

Should companies start also doing random tests to screen for how much someone is drinking alcohol each week? What about taxing people more who own boats, drive fast cars, go bungee-jumping etc....

:huh:

It seems to me that we need to be focusing on figuring out what is causing the rise in obesity to directly address that.

Kris

[fluffhead]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

If life insurance companies are allowed to charge me 30% more because my mother died young, then I'd say health insurance companies should be allowed to charge more for people leading unhealthy lifestyles.

[houseelf]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

If life insurance companies are allowed to charge me 30% more because my mother died young, then I'd say health insurance companies should be allowed to charge more for people leading unhealthy lifestyles.

Wow, I have a lengthy family history of both mental illness and diabetes, two diseases which notoriously create high health care costs. Where should we draw that line?

Kelly

[fluffhead]

Re: i am SHOCKED!

Wow, I have a lengthy family history of both mental illness and diabetes, two diseases which notoriously create high health care costs. Where should we draw that line?

Why not just do a DNA workup on the insured, and base our premiums on any predelictions of disease? We can call our company the Human Genome Insurance Group.
seriously, I agree with you Kelly - I don't know where it ends. Some states forbid using family history in life insurance premiums.
On the other hand, my libertarian side says that it's a private industry, and they should be allowed to set premiums as they see fit.
So maybe govt health care is the solution, while life insurance should remain in the private sector, using any screening factors they like to set premiums. The market will take care of it.