Study: More Americans too fat for X-rays, scans - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 07-26-2006, 10:21 PM
Veggie Regular
 
~Wonder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,182
From:http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/07/26...eut/index.html



Obesity hurting accuracy of images, doctors say.



WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- More and more obese people are unable to get full medical care because they are either too big to fit into scanners, or their fat is too dense for X-rays or sound waves to penetrate, radiologists reported Tuesday.



With 64 percent of the U.S. population either overweight or obese, the problem is worsening, but it represents a business opportunity for equipment makers and hospitals, said Dr. Raul Uppot, a radiologist at Massachusetts General Hospital.



"We noticed over the past couple of years that obesity was playing a role in our ability to see these images clearly," Uppot said in a telephone interview.



Radiologists have their own term for it when writing up reports: "These images are limited due to body habitus."
~Wonder is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 07-27-2006, 01:38 AM
Veggie Regular
 
troub's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,984
......................................__.......... ......................................

.............................,-~*`¯lllllll`*~,.................................. ........

.......................,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,....................................

..................,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,..................................

...............,-*lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll lllll.\\.................................

.............;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll\\........................... .....

..............\\lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/.........\\;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,...........................

...............\\lllllllllllllllllllll,-*...........`~-~-,...(.(¯`*,`,..........................

................\\llllllllllll,-~*.....................)_-\\..*`*;..)..........................

.................\\,-*`¯,*`)............,-~*`~................/.....................

..................|/.../.../~,......-~*,-~*`;................/.\\..................

................./.../.../.../..,-,..*~,.`*~*................*...\\.................

................|.../.../.../.*`...\\...........................)....)¯`~,.... ..............

................|./.../..../.......)......,.)`*~-,............/....|..)...`~-,.............

..............././.../...,*`-,.....`-,...*`....,---......\\..../...../..|.........¯```*~-,,,,

...............(..........)`*~-,....`*`.,-~*.,-*......|.../..../.../............\\........

................*-,.......`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*..........|.,*...,*...|..............\\........

...................*,.........`-,...)-,..............,-*`...,-*....(`-,............\\.......

......................f`-,.........`-,/...*-,___,,-~*....,-*......|...`-,..........\\........
troub is offline  
#3 Old 07-27-2006, 01:41 AM
Veggie Regular
 
troub's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,984
/insert head in hands ascii guy
troub is offline  
#4 Old 07-27-2006, 09:31 AM
Veggie Regular
 
ketivnilloc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 376
i'm not sure if i should laugh or deny that i am an american...or cry in shame
ketivnilloc is offline  
#5 Old 07-27-2006, 10:00 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,551
mystical jen sees the future: i see sales of vetinary large scale scanners going up. i see people getting taken to hospital on those boards they use for carrying large animals, in extra wide ambulances. i see someone making a fortune from their new invention of a fat permiating medical scanner. i see money being invested in this new equipment which could be perhaps better used in sending nutritionists into schools, and taking the pizza huts out of cafeterias.
jeneticallymodified is offline  
#6 Old 07-27-2006, 10:01 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,551
mystical jen sees the future: i see sales of vetinary large scale scanners going up. i see people getting taken to hospital on those boards they use for carrying large animals, in extra wide ambulances. i see someone making a fortune from their new invention of a fat permiating medical scanner. i see money being invested in this new equipment which could be perhaps better used in sending nutritionists into schools.
jeneticallymodified is offline  
#7 Old 07-27-2006, 11:58 AM
Vegan Police Officer
 
Diana's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,211
Time for some movement to start burning down all the fast food places. They could call it the "Food Liberation Front".



It is CRIMINAL to allow this trend to continue. Those in power HAVE the ability to do something about it.
Diana is offline  
#8 Old 07-27-2006, 01:27 PM
Veggie Regular
 
kpickell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 16,090
Diana, not everyone supports the government controlling what we can and can not eat. Somehow I don't think they'd pick the same things I would.
kpickell is offline  
#9 Old 07-27-2006, 01:40 PM
Vegan Police Officer
 
Diana's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,211
I didn't say the government must control what people can eat. I doubt that is possible except in an extreme totalitarian state.



What I meant was that they have the power to educate people in nutrition. They have the power to enforce laws so that it is CLEARLY indicated on food how much fat people are eating in a way that people UNDERSTAND it which is not the case now. They can pass laws that publicity for junk food is not passed during children's programmes (I think they have passed a law like this in Sweden recently).



If they can ban cigarette advertising they can also ban fast-food advertising. What is the difference between eating double Big-Macs with French Fries, and smoking a cigarette.... Not much in my opinion.



There's tons of things they can do in order for their people to be healthy. Shouldn't the government be there to HELP the people they serve??? By ensuring that future generations are not obsese (it's too late for the present ones unfortunately), they are investing BIG TIME in a healthy future.



But maybe the government cares nothing for the future generations...
Diana is offline  
#10 Old 07-27-2006, 02:08 PM
Veggie Regular
 
troub's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,984
Step 1 to nutritional educating the masses:





Feed our children in public schools HEALTHY food, insted of greasy slop.
troub is offline  
#11 Old 07-27-2006, 02:28 PM
Beginner
 
auggie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 192
Yeah,seriously.The stuff they serve in school cafes is total garbage.Pizza and fries.You'd think someone would have the foresight to revitalize things and start a vegan food bar...I would have loved that.
auggie is offline  
#12 Old 07-27-2006, 02:33 PM
Newbie
 
Jill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 70
I don't think the gov. is completely to blame about fast food consumption. No one forces those fatties to eat it. They go there, on their own free will, and order thousands of calories worth of food wrapped up in a bag. If they don't want to be fat, they should stop going there. Although, I do think that the gov. should enforce some limitations on it to discourage people from eating it such as taxing the hell out of it. And then maybe put that money into medical equipment designed to accomodate the super fat.
Jill is offline  
#13 Old 07-27-2006, 03:38 PM
Veggie Regular
 
vggiegirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post

those fatties





vggiegirl is offline  
#14 Old 07-27-2006, 03:52 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,551
Quote:
I don't think the gov. is completely to blame about fast food consumption. No one forces those fatties to eat it. They go there, on their own free will, and order thousands of calories worth of food wrapped up in a bag. If they don't want to be fat, they should stop going there. Although, I do think that the gov. should enforce some limitations on it to discourage people from eating it such as taxing the hell out of it. And then maybe put that money into medical equipment designed to accomodate the super fat.



this makes me think of the whole 'smokers rights' thing. the government (in the uk at least) whacks a whole load of tax on cigarettes, but ends up paying out fortunes each year in medical care for the results of smoking too. smoking is frowned apon, to an extent, by many people (like eating excessive amounts of junk food is?), nobody forces anyone to smoke either (or eat junkfood). smoking is addictive, (i believe some studies show sugar and fat to be too- though i'd say i had a harder time giving up smoking than sugar- but it can still be done with both things!), there are clear health incentives to stop doing both things (eg: you don't die so much, lol), its been made financially and socially more difficult to do it (smoking has, not junk food so far), advertising for both things is generally aimed at the young, (but advertising for cigarettes- in the uk has been severely limited), etc, and most people know how incredibly bad it is for them, but many still choose to smoke, and many choose to still eat junk food.



it seems clear that people know that eating junk, like smoking, isn't good for them. but seeing as they do choose to do it anyway- and with smoking- despite the measures put in place to disuade them from doing so, whats to say the same measures will work for junk food?



i've heard talk of healthcare systems, and other people, discussing refusing to treat, or minimising treatment, or forcing self funding for treatment, etc, for people for smoking related health problems.



can you see a time where the same thing applies for those who are overweight... and then maybe diabetics too... and those with extreme tooth decay, etc- where medical care says 'sorry, its your own fault, we warned you, you're on your own with that problem!'.



just curious.
jeneticallymodified is offline  
#15 Old 07-27-2006, 04:44 PM
Veggie Regular
 
troub's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,984
I say taxing fast food joints is a very good idea.
troub is offline  
#16 Old 07-27-2006, 04:54 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
I could have this completely wrong, but I'm giving it a shot anyway. I don't think taxing at a realistic level would do anything significant. One would assume that the people who are going to fast food restaurants and doing it so frequently that they become obese have rather inelastic demand for the food.



Granted, consumption would decrease, but I think it would be those who occasionally eat fast food or maybe get it for their kids who are the ones most likely to decrease their consumption. There would probably have to be a ridiculous high tax on the fast food to turn people away enough to make a difference in their weight. And then the tax money will go to stupid pork (no pun intended) barrel spending and other forms of spending, which may benefit the meat and dairy industries down the road anyway.



Just a thought.
GhostUser is offline  
#17 Old 07-27-2006, 04:54 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post

I don't think the gov. is completely to blame about fast food consumption. No one forces those fatties to eat it. They go there, on their own free will, and order thousands of calories worth of food wrapped up in a bag. If they don't want to be fat, they should stop going there. Although, I do think that the gov. should enforce some limitations on it to discourage people from eating it such as taxing the hell out of it. And then maybe put that money into medical equipment designed to accomodate the super fat.



yeah. those banal fat chicks at the mall scarfing down Cinnibons are ruining it for everyone.
GhostUser is offline  
#18 Old 07-27-2006, 04:57 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
the tax on ciggarettes hasn't done a lot to stop smokers.
GhostUser is offline  
#19 Old 07-27-2006, 04:58 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrpelle View Post

the tax on ciggarettes hasn't done a lot to stop smokers.



Yup, that's the inelastic demand I was talking about.
GhostUser is offline  
#20 Old 07-27-2006, 05:01 PM
Veggie Regular
 
ElliottsMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 800
now purpelle. I don't eat at cinnabon.
ElliottsMom is offline  
#21 Old 07-27-2006, 05:49 PM
Veggie Regular
 
healthnut32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 506
Oh, dear. I see health care costs soaring because of the extra cost of all those super-size x-ray machines.

I have to say that most of the people I know who are obese are NOT the inner-city poor. They own houses, go on vacations, have big-screen TV's and their kids always have the latest in video games. You can't turn the corner without falling over a gym in this area. It's also so easy to get good, fresh fruits and vegatables here. You don't HAVE to eat two Big Macs for lunch every day, or drink soda with every meal. One of the girls who comes to our dance studio is about 15 years, but she has the body a 40 year old woman who has had 3 kids. What does she eat? Donuts. Chocolate milk. French fries. And she attends at least 6 dance classes a week at a fairly pricey studio, so again it's not an issue of money.

It's a crime that so many in Southern California are so grossly overweight. A vast number of them are obese through the choices they make every day. Sure, fried food tastes better. Ice cream is more fun to eat than broccoli. And it's a pain sometimes to drag the kids to the gym. That's life. It's about making difficult choices-having one cookie instead of six; buying running shoes instead of getting a pedicure.
healthnut32 is offline  
#22 Old 07-27-2006, 06:24 PM
Veggie Regular
 
troub's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,984
the taxes on fast food would go to support health food programs at public schools.



people will still eat fast food sure, but if the extra revenue went directly to support lunch programs at public schools im all for it.



If Suzy Mc.Burgersloth wants to eat 5 whoppers today, thats her business. But if in doing so taxes were paid that went to support healthy lunch programs then at least we get a little out of people killing themselves.



Just like other taxes on vices support education to some degree.
troub is offline  
#23 Old 07-27-2006, 06:27 PM
Veggie Regular
 
troub's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,984
In my apartment complex I sometimes see people get in their car and drive their bag of trash down to the dumpster, all of like 100 feet.



it's pathetic.
troub is offline  
#24 Old 07-27-2006, 06:27 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by troub View Post




If Suzy Mc.Burgersloth wants to eat 5 whoppers today, thats her business.



Once we start taxing her food, it's not just her business anymore.
GhostUser is offline  
#25 Old 07-27-2006, 06:35 PM
Veggie Regular
 
troub's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,984
from here

Quote:
Livestock Subsidies in United States totaled $2.6 billion from 1995-2004.





As a tax payer I am currently paying for beef production.

All american vegans support the raising of cattle for food via taxes.



Quote:
Originally Posted by veggiejanie View Post

Once we start taxing her food, it's not just her business anymore.

You're right that it's not her business anymore, because as of right now, it already is ALL of our business. Every single one of us pays to support her fastfood addiction. What problem is there in the taxing of death burgers to support healthy lunches in public schools? So Mr. Extralargefrys has to pay an extra twenty cents? Big deal.
troub is offline  
#26 Old 07-27-2006, 07:25 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by troub View Post

from here







As a tax payer I am currently paying for beef production.

All american vegans support the raising of cattle for food via taxes.





You're right that it's not her business anymore, because as of right now, it already is ALL of our business. Every single one of us pays to support her fastfood addiction. What problem is there in the taxing of death burgers to support healthy lunches in public schools? So Mr. Extralargefrys has to pay an extra twenty cents? Big deal.

So is the solution to tax her and make her pay for healthy lunches in public schools? Taxes and spending is part of a giant, evil circle IMO. It has to end somewhere.



Every single one of us (in U.S.) is helping me to go to college, because I grew up in a single-parent, low income household and qualified for federal grants. Every single one of us is also helping families purchase cheaper meat in the grocery store. Even though I benefit from one of those scenarios doesn't mean I like the idea of it. It's the same with taxing fast food to get healthy food in public schools. I like that outcome a lot, but I don't like the means of accomplishing it. Let's find a better way.
GhostUser is offline  
#27 Old 07-27-2006, 07:28 PM
Veggie Regular
 
kpickell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 16,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana View Post

I didn't say the government must control what people can eat. I doubt that is possible except in an extreme totalitarian state.



What I meant was that they have the power to educate people in nutrition. They have the power to enforce laws so that it is CLEARLY indicated on food how much fat people are eating in a way that people UNDERSTAND it which is not the case now. They can pass laws that publicity for junk food is not passed during children's programmes (I think they have passed a law like this in Sweden recently).

I don't know how much more the government can do. Maybe you're underestimating what is being done because you're not from the United States. But the nutritional content of fast food is made very very clear. I am well aware of what I'm ordering when I order fast food, which I still choose to do a couple times each week.
kpickell is offline  
#28 Old 07-27-2006, 07:30 PM
Newbie
 
Jill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 70
Sorry I said anything because it seems that my personal opinion has upset some people. Thats just it though, it is MY opinion and that doesn't necessarily make it right or wrong. It does make me very mad though to see someone who is very overweight "scarfing" down giant size drinks and food items that are already full of fat, making americans look bad in general, by suing fast food companies for making them fat, when they don't have to eat it at all! Usually it is people of lesser income who buy lots of fast food, and are overweight too, so maybe if there WERE a tax on it, it would discourage them from buying it and buying things that were healthy.



There is course the fact that they are eating an animal, an animal that died to "feed their fat ass" (don't get upset, its a quote I heard) and a tax could keep more animals alive if people were consuming them less via fast food. If they can take SODA POPS, why not fast food.
Jill is offline  
#29 Old 07-27-2006, 07:32 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
And besides, if it bothers you that we have to pay for her fast food addiction, then don't you think it will bother her to pay for other people's kids' school lunches?



I'm just trying to say that it's an endless circle once you start taxing and spending to try to please everyone. It just doesn't work. Everyone is going to end up paying for something they don't like.



ETA: It's interesting to look at the rankings on this list: http://www.ewg.org/farm/region.php?fips=00000#topprogs
GhostUser is offline  
#30 Old 07-27-2006, 07:34 PM
Veggie Regular
 
kpickell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 16,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill View Post

Sorry I said anything because it seems that my personal opinion has upset some people. Thats just it though, it is MY opinion and that doesn't necessarily make it right or wrong. It does make me very mad though to see someone who is very overweight "scarfing" down giant size drinks and food items that are already full of fat, making americans look bad in general, by suing fast food companies for making them fat, when they don't have to eat it at all! Usually it is people of lesser income who buy lots of fast food, and are overweight too, so maybe if there WERE a tax on it, it would discourage them from buying it and buying things that were healthy.



There is course the fact that they are eating an animal, an animal that died to "feed their fat ass" (don't get upset, its a quote I heard) and a tax could keep more animals alive if people were consuming them less via fast food. If they can take SODA POPS, why not fast food.

It's not your opinion that's upsetting. It's your useage of degrading language. It's very common on this board for people to put down or make fun of overweight people, both overtly and subvertly through the use of language such as "fatty" and the use of quotes such as "fat ass"
kpickell is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off