Stop!!! You're Making Me Fat!!!

We are constantly seeing ads, medical reports, doctors and other 'learned' people telling us about the obesity problem in the United States and now ‘THE WORLD’.

The government, politicians, media, journalists, scientists, universities, medical establishment, sociologists and social commentators, claim that obesity is an epidemic, a plague, a crisis, an outrage, a catastrophe, a time bomb responsible for killing 400,000 overfed Americans every year, while ringing up over a $100-billion in health care costs.

To add to the ‘fat terrorism’ problem, people are being brainwashed to think that if they aren’t in the spa/gym at least five times per week, don’t have a pair of ‘skinny jeans’, don’t have a eight pack abdomen, wear a dress size less than six (European or US measurement), don’t have a pair of pants with the waist size under 30 inches (76cm) then you are absolutely useless in your existence as a human being. According to the experts and a certain Fitness Book that is distributed through several colleges/universities around the United States and other countries: “Overweight and obese persons have low self esteem, no friends or companions, small spurts of happiness, a unhealthy love of food, continuous failed relationships and are depressed to the point whereas some have considered suicide and others have succeeded in ending their lives”.

BULLSHIT!!! UTTER AND COMPLETE BULLSHIT!!!

I’ll tell you why:

THE TRUTH: We are experiencing mass moral outrage over fat. Nearly all the warnings about obesity are based on statistical conjecture made by those with the most to gain from the claims. The "obesity epidemic" is worth billions to the pharmaceutical, diet, weight loss, media, and government agencies fueling it.

The International Obesity Task Force (which authored many of the World Health Organization's obesity reports) and the American Obesity Association (which actively campaigns to have obesity officially designated as a disease) are largely funded by pharmaceutical and weight loss companies. Nearly every prominent obesity "expert" has received financial support from the $50-billion weight loss industry.

* For pharmaceutical companies the obesity epidemic justifies the release of new drugs and inflates stock prices.
* For weight loss companies and surgeons performing bariatric surgery, the "obesity epidemic" funds their fees paid by health insurance providers and Medicare.
* For women's magazines the "obesity epidemic" fattens ad revenue and readership with false and misleading weight loss propaganda.
* For government agencies the "obesity epidemic" inflates budgets and programs allegedly aimed at preventing people from getting fatter.

Being overweight and/or obese has been linked as the major causes of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, asthma, arthritis, impotence, depression, sleep apnea, deep vein thrombosis, and dementia.

However, when asked for the source of statistical data as well as the research documentation that should include blind and double blind studies – you won’t get it. These research companies cannot even tell you how many individuals participated in their studies. Don’t try the Freedom of Information Act (US) either as all of the studies are conducted by private companies who don’t have to release the data, but will release the ‘results’ of their studies.

THE TRUTH: Weight is not a barometer of wellness. More Americans die every year from weighing too little than from weighing too much (45,000 from disorders/organ failure associated with anorexia). An estimated 25,000 people die from morbid obesity. Moderately overweight people live longer than those at normal weight.

THE TRUTH: Obesity has not been found to be the primary cause of any of the above health problems. There is little evidence that adiposity (excess fat tissues) produces the claimed pathologies.

The researchers who estimated that obesity is costing us more than $100 billion a year in medical costs came up with this figure by calculating ALL expenses associated with treating type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, hypertension, gallbladder disease, and cancer. They ASSUME that if we get heart disease or breast cancer, it is because we're fat. Some have claimed that genetic history,exposure to toxic chemicals and STRESS has absolutely no relationship to the above named diseases.

The International Obesity Task Force estimates that 300 million people worldwide are obese and 750 million more are overweight, including 22 million children under age 5. They tend to show that one overweight child on television over and over. Watch and you'll see --- he has a stripped shirt, baggy tan coloured pants and a baseball cap!

According to the formula the U.S. government employs to measure weight, any person with a BMI over 25 is classified as overweight. BMI stands for Body Mass Index. It is a number that shows body weight adjusted for height. BMI can be calculated with simple math.

THE TRUTH: The B.M.I. doesn't tell you the percentage of body fat you're carrying, or how your fat is distributed. According to this measurement, half of the National Basketball Association is overweight or obese. 82% of the NFL is overweight or obese.

Some doctors and pseudo-scientific health organizations, like the International Obesity Task Force, have worked tirelessly (with substantial financial backing from diet and pharmaceutical companies) to lower the bar in determining those of us who are overweight and obese.

Until a report by the National Institute of Health (largely paid for by weight loss industry money paid to the International Obesity Task Force and the American Obesity Association) "overweight" was defined as having a BMI greater than 27 and "obese" meant your BMI was greater than 32.

After the 1998 NIH report, suddenly tens of millions of Americans became "obese" even though they had not gained a pound.

THE TRUTH: Today's average American adult is 7 to 14 pounds heavier than one thirty years ago. Not 40-70 pounds heavier as some ‘studies’ have suggested.

In the mid to late 90's, some 14 million prescriptions were written for Phen-Fen, a diet pill, before it was discovered to cause fatal heart problems and was pulled from the market.

In tests people who lost weight with the new drug Acomplia regained it all when they went off it. Apparently, the pill would have to be taken for years to be effective, though nobody knows what the long-term side effects might be. In the meantime, sales of Acomplia are expected to total $4 billion within two years.

Acomplia has two rivals on the market: Meridia, an appetite suppressant and Xenical, which prevents fat absorption. But Meridia can increase blood pressure, and Xenical causes diarrhea --- side effects that limit the products appeal. But the side effects of diarrhea, nausea, faintness, dizziness and racing heart rates, prevents you from eating therefore you lose weight, right? The work, right? How about death? The ultimate weight loss program?

THE TRUTH: Prescription ‘diet’ pills and obesity reducing surgeries amount to $50 billion plus dollars per year for the pharmaceutical companies. The amount that is being spent on diet supplements, programs and pills in the US alone (not FDA approved) is over $110 billion per year. They’ll keep telling us that we are fat and their pockets will get fatter.

Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that being overweight will contribute to certain disorders getting worse. However, what I don’t appreciate is the hyperbole that is being feed to people to the point where people who are not reflections of male and female models (which by the way are results of Photoshop) are being discriminated against and in some cases, ridiculed and insulted. People have lost their jobs and others won’t be hired because they don’t have the right ‘body image’.
So think about it next time you pass a moderately overweight or clinically obese person --- if the structure of the ‘ideal weight’ changes tomorrow, you could be one of ‘THEM’. The 'fat people' taking over the WORLD!

Revisiting Classic Science Fiction

Ever wonder if some classic sci-fi could be revisited or re-imagined?

I know....that is subjective rather than objective. But still, it's an interesting thought exercise given some of what is classed as "classic" science fiction.

I mean, could you accept anyone reinterpreting Philip Hose Farmer's "Riverworld"? The Sci-Fi Network's attempt seemed lame and totally without regard to Farmer's major points of wonder.

That is but one example of a host of examples showing the film world's terrible penchant for not getting the point. Remember the remake of "The Day the Earth Stood Still"? Guess what? The Earth never did stand still. No benevolent act of power it seemed was worthy of a mention....even though it was the vital point of the first film.

Should "The Day the Earth Stood Still" have been considered for a remake? Sure! But in a couple of years when whoever owns the rights tries it again, maybe this time they will remember Gort's awesome stature. As opposed to turning Gort into billions of radioactive dust bunnies.

That is not to say that all interpretations of the written word are as bad as that. As we know, some are untouchable classics. Well, only one really. I rue the day that anyone decides to remake "2001: A Space Odyssey".

But apart from that exception, I think just about any written science fiction classic has the potential to be visualised or re-visualised. As long as the original author's point is maintained.

For example (not a written book example, but valid scripts)....remember "The Outer Limits" from the 60's?

Season one, episode one, "The Galaxy Being" - Wanna know a secret? As a kid I never dreamed bad dreams. I never had a nightmare. Until I saw this particular episode back in the sixties.







Cliff Robertson and the "Galaxy Being"



That show freaked me out! When my family viewed it as a repeat back in the sixties, I hid behind the sofa......I was terrified.

But I grew up and the nightmares stopped.

Still, I have always been fascinated by the "Kubrick-esque" aspect of the "Galaxy Being" episode.

"Kubrick-esque"? Sure! Note the blinding brightness of the Californian sky in the beginning. The clinical difference between one scene composition and another. The careful reasoning meant for the science questions that were sure to follow. This episode of "The Outer Limits" is a classic for those reasons alone.

It only took me 40 f***ing years to get that. But then again, I didn't know Kubrick back then.

But one night, I asked myself a question.........could that be re-written? Could that be updated? Could that be re-prepared for a 2010 audience but still be faithful to the original? I mean, the facts that have overtaken the original zeitgeist are enormous. But still, could it be reworked keeping the original moral question intact?

I think it could.

What do you think?

I'd like to ask readers (if any) to comment on how best the original intent of the story could be served and how the technology could be updated to reflect the 21st century and not seem so hokey.

I have a good idea.......but do you?