fflo | a little something nice about how fat is omg costing people so much of what they hold so very dear

a little something nice about how fat is omg costing people so much of what they hold so very dear

($$, that is.) (or maybe i should say imaginary $$, $$ of the conjectural chosen focus.)

CarrieP at Big Fat Blog sends us to a new Paul Campos interview at the Atlantic. She points out that the comment thread there is unusually thoughtful, compared to what often follows "obesity" pieces online. I haven't gotten that far with it yet myself, but I'm liking the interview, in bits and pieces today.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I read and liked that one, too.

i'm still wading through, but i'm wondering how much of that cost difference is the cost of trying to make fat people into thin people. the difference in cost seemed like the cost for a few prescriptions, like say diet pills, or medical weight loss surgeries. given how common and expensive surgeries are, they must have a significant impact on the "cost of healthcare" for those deemed fat.

and i read two more paragraphs and it's answered - doh.

amy goodman mentioned campos in her interview with david kessler this morning on democracy now. since kessler is very much about the epidemic of obesity, i wondered how he'd respond. mostly, he didn't--talking about type II diabetes instead. couldn't tell whether he was dismissing campos or simply saying these are separate issues that overlap. the show in general was a critique of the food industry. and of how freakin' much salt sugar and fat we all eat.

huh. that diabetes hook seems to be slung out like it's a dismissal, often enough.

amy rules.

ANJALI KAMAT: And your reaction, Dr. Kessler, to the latest report from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention on how much obesity costs add to the overall medical costs? And also, if you can also talk about when obesity started increasing in this country, when it became an epidemic of sorts?

DR. DAVID KESSLER: Very concerning, certainly as a pediatrician. Back ten years ago, there were four cases of Type 2 diabetes per thousand individuals. Time 2 diabetes, I could just as well write “obesity” on the medical chart for the vast majority of cases. Today, that number has more than doubled; there are nine cases per thousand individuals.

But my greatest concern is that the incidence of Type 2 diabetes, which used to show itself in individuals in their fifties and sixties, we’re now seeing in children. We’re seeing, you know, as young as children as ten, twelve, fourteen. And my concern is that, you know, we used to have adults live for two, three decades, right, with Type 2 diabetes, the renal implications, the eye complications, the peripheral vascular complications. They would live for two, three decades. And those consequences, you know, were major. But now you’re going to have children who are going to live for five, six, seven decades after the onset of Type 2 diabetes, and the amount of morbidity, as well as mortality, that will result is very, very concerning.

AMY GOODMAN: What about those who are saying that this whole issue of obesity costing Americans so much, I mean, in terms of chronic diseases and now as we talk about health insurance and health insurance reform, is simply a way of pushing diet pills? I’m looking at a piece that says this week Health Affairs published a new study showing obesity accounts for an ever-growing share our healthcare costs. So the author decided to interview Paul Campos, the author of The Obesity Myth, which argues that the health benefits of losing weight are largely imaginary, that we’re using health to advance our class bias in favor of thin people, particularly thin women. Dr. David Kessler?

DR. DAVID KESSLER: Type 2 diabetes, a very serious illness, it results from the accumulation, we think, of fat and muscle that affects glucose, metabolism in the bloodstream. It has profound consequences.

In fact, when I—--the reason I started writing the book---I was sitting in my office at Yale Medical School with a group of residents and fellows, and I said, “If you want to stay alive, what are the things you can do?” I mean, three-quarters of us are going to die from either cancer, heart disease or stroke. And it was very interesting. I started pulling all the literature on how—on the evidence on how you can prevent those three major killers, cardiovascular disease, cancer and stroke. And it was very interesting, because the librarian who was helping me over a period of months, I noticed, as she was pulling those articles, she lost thirty pounds. We all know that weight is not good for us, but I don’t think we understand the extent to which it really contributes to significant morbidity and mortality.

thanks. i was just clicking towards the piece, but had gotten waylaid with other clicking.

he totally ignores the question. oh, wait-- i'm not being fair: "We all know that weight is not good for us," (there's some science) (ugh) "but I don’t think we understand the extent to which it really contributes to significant morbidity and mortality." that's right, doc, we don't. but our continuing to pursue/trumpet that angle has nothing to do with making money, i'm sure.

now the librarian losing weight, that was surely about the benefit of his research.

the "fetch dr. kessler's files" diet. it works! thirty pounds over a period of mere months! next time he tells it, maybe he can include how many dress sizes she went down.

well yeah--all those parts were stupid. but that doesn't resolve much for me either. i had some issues with campos as well. maybe she could have them both on at once.

you wanna watch a throw-down, maybe?

i'd like to learn something i guess so i can make my own decision. seems like there's propagandizing on both sides.

no doubt.

wondering a little what kind of decision(s) you mean.

who i agree with, who i don't, what i find helpful/misguided/wrong. the critique of the pharmaceutical industry is a given, but that doesn't tell me anything about the increase in type II diabetes, for example. some industry is making money all the time--i'm sure people advocating for fat acceptance wouldn't want chili's chiming in "hell yeah!" while they double fry those buffalo wings and cover them in salt, fat and sugar (with salt, fat, and sugar on the side for dipping). the critique of our culture and its obsession with thin--got it. but that's not a critique of the link between weight and type II diabetes. i kinda see the obesity myth argument as an anvil of sorts--in what little i know so far. it has a big target and it drops a bomb on it and i think that's useful to a certain degree. but considering people's health is at issue--mental and otherwise--i'd like more dialogue and less pointing fingers. maybe that will come finally.

also, fat kids get me upset.

well it kind of actually is a critique of that link--- of the making of that link, of the touting of that link, of the context of (the construction of) fat in that link and others, and in the whole debate, the assumed premises of debate. campos doesn't make just one argument, but one thing he'd like to see questioned (and his anvil implicitly questions) is how the discussion itself reflects and shapes the cultural things you say "got it" to.

fat people have such extensive experience of "health" used as a weapon against us, used in discourse that scapegoats us and truly contributes to our oppression. the kind of skepticism you exhibit, which is perhaps encouraged in people encountering/entertaining campos, is our friend, in that struggle. many of us struggle, as do many not-fat people, with what and how to eat, and how to cope with psychological issues there, along with a slew of others, but the damage done to us by the war on obesity, and our struggle with that, gets way too little attention. even something like evidence along the lines of "diets don't work" gets co-opted by the diet industry. and pharma is a scarier foe than the weight loss biz. a goliath. we need all the davids and slingshots we can round up.

just by asking that question, amy let loose one little rock.

i just got a phone call from a fat kid who's upset. not about fat, just now....

Edited 2009-08-04 19:06 (UTC)

"well it kind of actually is a critique of that link--- of the making of that link, of the touting of that link, of the context of (the construction of) fat in that link and others, and in the whole debate, the assumed premises of debate. campos doesn't make just one argument, but one thing he'd like to see questioned (and his anvil implicitly questions) is how the discussion itself reflects and shapes the cultural things you say "got it" to."

yeah but...i'm getting that sick grad school feeling, with thoughts of "interrogating" as the ultimate goal. a cultural critic can tell me many things, but he/she can't tell me whether there's a link between weight and type II diabetes. i mean, i understand how the premises of debate get set and how the premises can be wrong. but if i had my mother back for example i wouldn't not sweat this possible link because i note propaganda when i see it. because there's an obesity myth, and diets don't work, i wouldn't say to a loved one--oh that's all bullshit. i'd want to sort through the various angles--and agendas--and try to figure out what's true. and if "fat acceptance" has to extend to the food industry, no thanks. i think they do make us all more unhealthy. and i do believe in what kessler calls "conditioned hypereating," etc.

(i'll do anything not to work!)

i think i hear what you're saying here. and ftr (this woman i was chatting with yesterday used "ftr" for short, leaving me to wonder for half an hour what it might stand for, before i finally got "for the record") (so much for shorthand), no version of fat acceptance i know about is cheering for the food industry or for eating disorders (or disordered eating) or for clogged blood vessels or messed up insulin response or sickness or disease or death.

i do think the academic-ish tearing apart (or interrogating or dismantling or pick-your-fashion-word) of unexamined or insufficiently examined cultural practices can have quite real real-world effects. and is worthwhile. if often tedious and irritating and self-congratulatory and a lot of other objectionable/irritating things.

it's funny actually--while googling campos i came across this:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_072909/content/01125114.guest.html

ok i'll work now...

oh lordy. speaking of fat people eating, i may have to let my lunch settle a little more before i take on that one!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

a little something nice about how fat is omg costing people so much of what they hold so very dear

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler

Re: here's the bit, amy/cohost/kessler