Obese must get treatment or lose benefits says PM:

David Cameron will today launch review into cost of obesity and addiction
   The prime minister will pledge to make 'support and treatment' available
   But said he wanted to see more people 'coming off benefits and into work'

Obese people who refuse medical treatment to help them lose weight could have their benefits cut, the Prime Minister will announce today.

David Cameron will launch a review to work out the cost to taxpayers and the economy of 'preventable' conditions such as obesity and drug and alcohol addiction.

He has asked a government health adviser to examine plans to force people with health problems to undertake treatment when claiming benefits.
Mr Cameron will pledge to make 'support and treatment' available to those with drug and alcohol problems, and the obese, who want 'the opportunity to improve their lives'.

But he will add: 'We must look at what we do when people simply say no thanks and refuse that help but expect taxpayers to carry on funding their benefits.
Over the next five years I want to see many more people coming off sick benefit and into work.'
WAR ON SLEAZE? SEND FOR HOON

Disgraced former Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon watched as David Cameron gave a speech on tackling corruption yesterday.

Mr Hoon – one of the most senior politicians caught up in the ‘cash for access’ scandal in 2010 – was part of a UK trade delegation in Singapore.

The ex-Labour MP was filmed saying he expected £3,000 a day to help firms lobbying ministers. He is now a top manager at helicopter maker AgustaWestland. Mr Hoon’s appointment in 2011 caused disquiet as the firm had won a £1.7billion deal when he was Defence Secretary.

Around 90,000 people claiming sickness benefits, worth on average around £100 a week, whose primary condition is alcoholism or drug addiction could have their payments docked unless they agree to treatment. A further 1,800 receive incapacity benefit with the main reason listed as weight-related issues.

The claimants currently get offered treatment such as courses and medication to help them get better and back to work, but there is no legal requirement to accept the help.

Dame Carol Black, chairman of the Nuffield Trust and an adviser to the Department of Health, will today make an urgent call for evidence from experts and medical specialists before providing recommendations.

She said: 'Addiction to drugs and alcohol, and in some cases extreme obesity, can have a profoundly damaging impact on people's chances of taking up meaningful employment.

'By reviewing the support that is available here and abroad to people with these conditions, it is my hope that we can present a thorough analysis of the options available to Government. I am looking forward to discussing these issues with as many people as possible.'



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i guess he will be in favour of eugenics very soon

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11407747/Fat-genes-are-to-blame-for-a-fifth-of-obesity.html


Fat genes are to blame for more than a fifth of obesity meaning exercise and dieting are of little use to millions, a new study has found.

The landmark research, published in the journal Nature, is the most precise estimate yet for the percentage of obesity caused by DNA rather than lifestyle and is expected to fuel moves to categorise obesity as a disability.
--------------------------------------------------------------


this fucking government is getting beyond a joke more like 1940 germany that 2015 uk

If they accept medical treatment they wont lose out though.

There is a serious obesity crisis that largely IS caused by bad diet and lack of physical activity in the UK. The government shouldn't be supporting that kind of lifestyle should they?

The condition is accepting treatment, if someone doesn't want to accept help why should they be allowed to accept handouts?

I don't always support the Tory government, but on tjis I fully agree.

Eilzel wrote:If they accept medical treatment they wont lose out though.

There is a serious obesity crisis that largely IS caused by bad diet and lack of physical activity in the UK. The government shouldn't be supporting that kind of lifestyle should they?

The condition is accepting treatment, if someone doesn't want to accept help why should they be allowed to accept handouts?

I don't always support the Tory government, but on tjis I fully agree.

and how do you differentiate between a genetic disposition to be over weight and bad diet

and how do you correct a bad diet when the cheap food  is heavy in surger and fats  to make it taste better you can only eat healthy if you can afford it

The NHS incurs £3.5bn a year in costs related to alcohol.

Direct cost of overweight and obesity to the NHS at £3.2 billion..

Alcohol-related crime costs £11bn per year

obesity related crime ? is there any


seems obese people are an easy target and the torys do like a easy target

Sorry Korben I am all for this and the same should be applied to smokers and drinkers.You want benefits, then you look to see help to quit smoking and if you have a drink problem.
Many people are in poor health because of food, smoking and drinking and its time people placed their health as a priority. It does not matter if genetic or not, they still require needing assistance for this condition which Alcoholism is a condition also.

Cuchulain wrote:Sorry Korben I am all for this and the same should be applied to smokers and drinkers.You want benefits, then you look to see help to quit smoking and if you have a drink problem.
Many people are in poor health because of food, smoking and drinking and its time people placed their health as a priority. It does not matter if genetic or not, they still require needing assistance for this condition which Alcoholism is a condition also.

No that`s ok if it is self inflicted trough greed
but i draw the line when it`probably a genetic cause you cant (or have great difficulty) fighting that and if you start discriminating because of a genetic preposition to a certain conditions then your heading down a very slippery slope indeed ,where do you draw the line

however that said being overweight is not a reason to avoid working i can relate a couple of personal accounts where a massively overweight person works just as hard as the next person and in some cases more so

one for example is
my friend (the scrap collector i have mentioned ) is massively overweight but everyday he is doing more exercise and physical activity in one day than i see in 6 months  he does`t eat much more than would be considered normal yet he cant loose weight

people think all overweight are overweight through a concious choice or un-concious  but they are many reasons and as i pointed out above A fifth of people are overweight because of a genetic preposition

yes they are medical reasons as well ,a glandular problem is a common cause of obesity depression is an other cause we have all heard of "comfort food these are the issues that need addressing but that for a doctor not the government to address

look at its this way people used to think homosexuality was a treatable condition and some idiots still do for years they where "sanctioned "in many ways, government's did and in some country`s still do legislate against it

but as i said when you start legislating and sanctioning  people its a slippery slope, help ,education sure ,but punishment and pushing the "undesirable" traits in society in to deeper poverty and humiliation smacks of eugenics in its very basic form

i am lucky 6.1ft 13 stone have been that way most of my life i eat as much and as often as i want very sugary foods and high fat content stuff
i eat burgers and chips ect like there is no tomorrow i never put weight on EVER i have a high metabolic rate others are not so lucky

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:Sorry Korben I am all for this and the same should be applied to smokers and drinkers.You want benefits, then you look to see help to quit smoking and if you have a drink problem.
Many people are in poor health because of food, smoking and drinking and its time people placed their health as a priority. It does not matter if genetic or not, they still require needing assistance for this condition which Alcoholism is a condition also.

No that`s ok if it is self inflicted trough greed
but i draw the line when it`probably a genetic cause you cant (or have great difficulty) fighting that and if you start discriminating because of a genetic preposition to a certain conditions then your heading down a very slippery slope indeed ,where do you draw the line

however that said being overweight is not a reason to avoid working i can relate a couple of personal accounts where a massively overweight person works just as hard as the next person and in some cases more so

one for example is
my friend (the scrap collector i have mentioned ) is massively overweight but everyday he is doing more exercise and physical activity in one day than i see in 6 months  he does`t eat much more than would be considered normal yet he cant loose weight

people think all overweight are overweight through a concious choice or un-concious  but they are many reasons and as i pointed out above A fifth of people are overweight because of a genetic preposition

yes they are medical reasons as well ,a glandular problem is a common cause of obesity depression is an other cause we have all heard of "comfort food these are the issues that need addressing but that for a doctor not the government to address

look at its this way people used to think homosexuality was a treatable condition and some idiots still do for years they where "sanctioned "in many ways, government's did and in some country`s still do legislate against it

but as i said when you start legislating and sanctioning  people its a slippery slope, help ,education sure ,but punishment and pushing the "undesirable" traits in society in to deeper poverty and humiliation smacks of eugenics in its very basic form  

Sorry but to go off something that is not medically treated like homosexuality is far removed from where people are in health risk being overweight. Again having a condition whether obese or alcoholism requires people to help themselves more than anything and they need to take the best medical help going. Just because something is genetic does not mean they should not seek help and excusing them seeking help is not helping them in any shape or form. If they do not, what do you suggest that they continue to receive payments because they want to remain unhealthy? Sorry that is not good enough and it has nothing to do with any stereoptypes people have but their health being a top priority.
The fact is this is designed to help people seek medicla assistance when they should seek help, as its is in their best interest. Why should someone continue to receive benefits when they are not going to seek the best medical help going. They place themselves within in some cases into the group of those with disabilities. These conditions are treatable no matter if genetic. So I fail to see how this is not going to help.
So even if genetic they should be seeking medical help and if they are not, do you just allow that to contiue with them placing their health at risk? I would rather something is done. I think we are not doing enough to enusre being seek help and to me this is needed when far to many in the west are obese.

KD is right
Also, where is all the money for this treatment coming from?
All that will happen is people will be given a diet sheet and told to get on with it and when they don't, guess what?! You guessed it, benefit sanctions!

Nems wrote:KD is right
Also, where is all the money for this treatment coming from?
All that will happen is people will be given a diet sheet and told to get on with it and when they don't, guess what?! You guessed it, benefit sanctions!

No they will not be given a diet sheet, espcially if genetic.
All I am seeing is that people wish to allow the situation to get out of hand where people are obese are allowed to continue to do nothing where their health is a priority. Here there is incentive to do something about it and this problem is growing each year in this country which little is being doen about to combat which again education within schools should be the top priority.
I find it appalling that people wish to allow a situation to continue and that we should do nothing.
Benefits more than anything are there to assit people get back into work or assit on low incomes. Unless you are physcially unable to work then they are not something that people should be reliant on.
This whole view to benefits is wrong and yes wages needed to change but the fact is the health of people in this country is creating a massive strain on the NHS and doing nothing about this is just plain daft.

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
No that`s ok if it is self inflicted trough greed
but i draw the line when it`probably a genetic cause you cant (or have great difficulty) fighting that and if you start discriminating because of a genetic preposition to a certain conditions then your heading down a very slippery slope indeed ,where do you draw the line

however that said being overweight is not a reason to avoid working i can relate a couple of personal accounts where a massively overweight person works just as hard as the next person and in some cases more so

one for example is
my friend (the scrap collector i have mentioned ) is massively overweight but everyday he is doing more exercise and physical activity in one day than i see in 6 months  he does`t eat much more than would be considered normal yet he cant loose weight

people think all overweight are overweight through a concious choice or un-concious  but they are many reasons and as i pointed out above A fifth of people are overweight because of a genetic preposition

yes they are medical reasons as well ,a glandular problem is a common cause of obesity depression is an other cause we have all heard of "comfort food these are the issues that need addressing but that for a doctor not the government to address

look at its this way people used to think homosexuality was a treatable condition and some idiots still do for years they where "sanctioned "in many ways, government's did and in some country`s still do legislate against it

but as i said when you start legislating and sanctioning  people its a slippery slope, help ,education sure ,but punishment and pushing the "undesirable" traits in society in to deeper poverty and humiliation smacks of eugenics in its very basic form  

Sorry but to go off something that is not medically treated like homosexuality is far removed from where people are in health risk being overweight. Again having a condition whether obese or alcoholism requires people to help themselves more than anything and they need to take the best medical help going. Just because something is genetic does not mean they should not seek help and excusing them seeking help is not helping them in any shape or form. If they do not, what do you suggest that they continue to receive payments because they want to remain unhealthy? Sorry that is not good enough and it has nothing to do with any stereoptypes people have but their health being a top priority.
The fact is this is designed to help people seek medicla assistance when they should seek help, as its is in their best interest. Why should someone continue to receive benefits when they are not going to seek the best medical help going. They place themselves within in some cases into the group of those with disabilities. These conditions are treatable no matter if genetic. So I fail to see how this is not going to help.
So even if genetic they should be seeking medical help and if they are not, do you just allow that to contiue with them placing their health at risk? I would rather something is done. I think we are not doing enough to enusre being seek help and to me this is needed when far to many in the west are obese.

but homosexuality was at one time seen as a medical condition and detrimental to there health and treatments where devised that`s was the point i was making

and genetics is genetics no amount of medical intervention will change that if it could believe me i would agree with you but it cant (yet)

for example my daughter has a genetic condition she has had 27 major operations at what cost to the NHS i cant imagine and i am grateful for that ,she has had physio ect yes it helps a little but you cant change the underlying condition no matter how hard you wish i have tried  that's the essence of my point

and i don`t think people want to be fat as a general rule

Cuchulain wrote:

Nems wrote:KD is right
Also, where is all the money for this treatment coming from?
All that will happen is people will be given a diet sheet and told to get on with it and when they don't, guess what?! You guessed it, benefit sanctions!

No they will not be given a diet sheet, espcially if genetic.
All I am seeing is that people wish to allow the situation to get out of hand where people are obese are allowed to continue to do nothing where their health is a priority. Here there is incentive to do something about it and this problem is growing each year in this country which little is being doen about to combat which again education within schools should be the top priority.
I find it appalling that people wish to allow a situation to continue and that we should do nothing.
Benefits more than anything are there to assit people get back into work or assit on low incomes. Unless you are physcially unable to work then they are not something that people should be reliant on.
This whole view to benefits is wrong and yes wages needed to change but the fact is the health of people in this country is creating a massive strain on the NHS and doing nothing about this is just plain daft.

Nobody is saying nothing should be done ,help and education is what is needed not sanctions by the government  as i said its the seed`s of a very nazi philosophy IMO

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Sorry but to go off something that is not medically treated like homosexuality is far removed from where people are in health risk being overweight. Again having a condition whether obese or alcoholism requires people to help themselves more than anything and they need to take the best medical help going. Just because something is genetic does not mean they should not seek help and excusing them seeking help is not helping them in any shape or form. If they do not, what do you suggest that they continue to receive payments because they want to remain unhealthy? Sorry that is not good enough and it has nothing to do with any stereoptypes people have but their health being a top priority.
The fact is this is designed to help people seek medicla assistance when they should seek help, as its is in their best interest. Why should someone continue to receive benefits when they are not going to seek the best medical help going. They place themselves within in some cases into the group of those with disabilities. These conditions are treatable no matter if genetic. So I fail to see how this is not going to help.
So even if genetic they should be seeking medical help and if they are not, do you just allow that to contiue with them placing their health at risk? I would rather something is done. I think we are not doing enough to enusre being seek help and to me this is needed when far to many in the west are obese.

but homosexuality was at one time seen as a medical condition and detrimental to there health and treatments where devised that`s was the point i was making

and genetics is genetics no amount of medical intervention will change that if it could believe me i would agree with you but it cant (yet)

for example my daughter has a genetic condition she has had 27 major operations at what cost to the NHS i cant imagine and i am grateful for that ,she has had physio ect yes it helps a little but you cant change the underlying condition no matter how hard you wish i have tried  that's the essence of my point

and i don`t think people want to be fat as a general rule

Again it is moot point Korben because obesity is always going to be a medical condition whether genetic or not. So to use homosexuality has no bearing here, as what you are claiming as obesity is not a medical condition, which then even furthers proves that people are causing this themselves. The fact is some do over indulge though I am very sure like alcoholism it is very much like many conditions and is addictive. Where also there is links to depression and anxiety as well. More than anything it is one area where people do need help and they are not wanting to help themselves. The fact is taking the view all are like this when many are not and just over indulge is ignoring the fact all within this group need assistance and if they are on benefits they can seek this assistance. So it matters not if genetic or not they still need medical assiatance and hence why allowing them to do nothing is not solving the issue at all. It just allows this to continue. I am all for more conditions on benefits where people then need to do something that can assist them and doing nothing is not the answer.

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

No they will not be given a diet sheet, espcially if genetic.
All I am seeing is that people wish to allow the situation to get out of hand where people are obese are allowed to continue to do nothing where their health is a priority. Here there is incentive to do something about it and this problem is growing each year in this country which little is being doen about to combat which again education within schools should be the top priority.
I find it appalling that people wish to allow a situation to continue and that we should do nothing.
Benefits more than anything are there to assit people get back into work or assit on low incomes. Unless you are physcially unable to work then they are not something that people should be reliant on.
This whole view to benefits is wrong and yes wages needed to change but the fact is the health of people in this country is creating a massive strain on the NHS and doing nothing about this is just plain daft.

Nobody is saying nothing should be done ,help and education is what is needed not sanctions by the government  as i said its the seed`s of a very nazi philosophy IMO

The point is many people in this situation are doing very little.
Again benefits is there to assit people not become a dependency.

look at that tv program FAT camp most did not succeed even with professional help and guidance
sanctioning people is not the answer

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
Nobody is saying nothing should be done ,help and education is what is needed not sanctions by the government  as i said its the seed`s of a very nazi philosophy IMO

The point is many people in this situation are doing very little.
Again benefits is there to assit people not become a dependency.

That may be true but who decides ? the government ?

korban dallas wrote:look at that tv program FAT camp most did not succeed even with professional help and guidance
sanctioning people is not the answer  

Why though Korben?
People have to want to help themselves and if they do not, then like any addiction, they are unlikely to succeed.
So yes if you start to ensure people are going to lose their benefits unless they start to help themselves, then I am all for it as it more than anything is there to help them be healthier. To me the problem is as much a mental health issue which needs that assistance but to think something has been a failure to not try other methods is just raising the white flag to an ongoing issue.

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

The point is many people in this situation are doing very little.
Again benefits is there to assit people not become a dependency.

That may be true but who decides ? the government ?

Democracy does.

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
but homosexuality was at one time seen as a medical condition and detrimental to there health and treatments where devised that`s was the point i was making

and genetics is genetics no amount of medical intervention will change that if it could believe me i would agree with you but it cant (yet)

for example my daughter has a genetic condition she has had 27 major operations at what cost to the NHS i cant imagine and i am grateful for that ,she has had physio ect yes it helps a little but you cant change the underlying condition no matter how hard you wish i have tried  that's the essence of my point

and i don`t think people want to be fat as a general rule

Again it is moot point Korben because obesity is always going to be a medical condition whether genetic or not. So to use homosexuality has no bearing here, as what you are claiming as obesity is not a medical condition, which then even furthers proves that people are causing this themselves. The fact is some do over indulge though I am very sure like alcoholism it is very much like many conditions and is addictive. Where also there is links to depression and anxiety as well. More than anything it is one area where people do need help and they are not wanting to help themselves. The fact is taking the view all are like this when many are not and just over indulge is ignoring the fact all within this group need assistance and if they are on benefits they can seek this assistance. So it matters not if genetic or not they still need medical assiatance and hence why allowing them to do nothing is not solving the issue at all. It just allows this to continue. I am all for more conditions on benefits where people then need to do something that can assist them and doing nothing is not the answer.

no what i am saying is a fifth of obesity is genetic and not self inflicted how do you differentiate ?

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
That may be true but who decides ? the government ?

Democracy does.

Democracy ? how so

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


Again it is moot point Korben because obesity is always going to be a medical condition whether genetic or not. So to use homosexuality has no bearing here, as what you are claiming as obesity is not a medical condition, which then even furthers proves that people are causing this themselves. The fact is some do over indulge though I am very sure like alcoholism it is very much like many conditions and is addictive. Where also there is links to depression and anxiety as well. More than anything it is one area where people do need help and they are not wanting to help themselves. The fact is taking the view all are like this when many are not and just over indulge is ignoring the fact all within this group need assistance and if they are on benefits they can seek this assistance. So it matters not if genetic or not they still need medical assiatance and hence why allowing them to do nothing is not solving the issue at all. It just allows this to continue. I am all for more conditions on benefits where people then need to do something that can assist them and doing nothing is not the answer.

no what i am saying is a fifth of obesity is genetic and not self inflicted how do you differentiate ?  

I have already said no matter if genetic or not they still need to help themselves by taking treatment and help.
Alcoholism can be genetic are you aware?
So again more than anything even if genetic we need to help people come forward and seek assistance.

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Democracy does.

Democracy ? how so

We vot in a party into power to make policies, if you disagree you vote in someone to change that.
I believe the majority will agree with the policy.

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:look at that tv program FAT camp most did not succeed even with professional help and guidance
sanctioning people is not the answer  

Why though Korben?
People have to want to help themselves and if they do not, then like any addiction, they are unlikely to succeed.
So yes if you start to ensure people are going to lose their benefits unless they start to help themselves, then I am all for it as it more than anything is there to help them be healthier. To me the problem is as much a mental health issue which needs that assistance but to think something has been a failure to not try other methods is just raising the white flag to an ongoing issue.

they wanted to help the self`s that`s why they took part in the tv program

so what you seem to be saying its ok to be fat if your not on benefits, regardless of the health implications yet people who are in work and fat still cost the NHS regardless if there in work or not
sorry IMO that`s just discrimination because your poor

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
Democracy ? how so

We vot in a party into power to make policies, if you disagree you vote in someone to change that.
I believe the majority will agree with the policy.

in the uk 70% of population obese or too fat.so i think you will find the opposite

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Why though Korben?
People have to want to help themselves and if they do not, then like any addiction, they are unlikely to succeed.
So yes if you start to ensure people are going to lose their benefits unless they start to help themselves, then I am all for it as it more than anything is there to help them be healthier. To me the problem is as much a mental health issue which needs that assistance but to think something has been a failure to not try other methods is just raising the white flag to an ongoing issue.

they wanted to help the self`s that`s why they took part in the tv program

so what you seem to be saying  its ok to be fat if your not on benefits, regardless of the health implications yet people who are in work and fat still cost the NHS regardless if there in work or not
sorry IMO that`s just discrimination because your poor

I disagree as them wanting to help themselves as if they did they would be going in the right direction.
It could have easily been more about getting themselves on TV.
A person who recognises they have a problem takes the first step to help combating the problem, but it takes far more than that.
People in work who are fat are paying taxess though and even then I think companies should be doing far more to help combat this.
Its not discrmination, where if people need assistance and are being allowed to continue which is making their health worse then we are all letting them down. I am all for more things to be part of a condition of benefits, because they are there in the main to assist people back into work and if we can use an area to further help people, then that is an added incentive.
I would personally have a huge tax placed on sugar to make such sugary luxeries expensive.

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

We vot in a party into power to make policies, if you disagree you vote in someone to change that.
I believe the majority will agree with the policy.

in the uk 70% of population obese or too fat.so i think you will find the opposite

That is a medical index of which many are not obese at all.
It goes by weight, height etc of what should be the right weight based on heigh and is an average indicator.
We are not talking about the majority of people within this medical index.
We are talking about people who are obese, not slightly overweight who are in that category and who can be very physically fit.

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
no what i am saying is a fifth of obesity is genetic and not self inflicted how do you differentiate ?  

I have already said no matter if genetic or not they still need to help themselves by taking treatment and help.
Alcoholism can be genetic are you aware?
So again more than anything even if genetic we need to help people come forward and seek assistance.

indeed i am aware and alcohol costs society more than obesity and as i said i don`t think it should be ignored and help and education is a big part to play but not sanctions in the way that Cameron is suggesting thats just more poor bashing

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

I have already said no matter if genetic or not they still need to help themselves by taking treatment and help.
Alcoholism can be genetic are you aware?
So again more than anything even if genetic we need to help people come forward and seek assistance.

indeed i am aware and alcohol costs society more than obesity and as i said i don`t think it should be ignored and help and education is a big part to play but not sanctions in the way that Cameron is suggesting thats just more poor bashing

I see it as the way forward, as why allow people on this condition to use their benefit money to continue abusing their bodies with alcohol and food? That is not helping them but assisting them continue the condition they have.

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
in the uk 70% of population obese or too fat.so i think you will find the opposite

That is a medical index of which many are not obese at all.
It goes by weight, height etc of what should be the right weight based on heigh and is an average indicator.
We are not talking about the majority of people within this medical index.
We are talking about people who are obese, not slightly overweight who are in that category and who can be very physically fit.

yes its a medical index ? so the government should decide regardless of the medical index and how much is slightly over ?
sorry dude its a stupid and discriminatory idea from Cameron
and smacks of 1940 Germany where coincidently a person suffering from severe alcoholism may be also rendered incapable of procreation(sterilised)

slippery slope

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

That is a medical index of which many are not obese at all.
It goes by weight, height etc of what should be the right weight based on heigh and is an average indicator.
We are not talking about the majority of people within this medical index.
We are talking about people who are obese, not slightly overweight who are in that category and who can be very physically fit.

yes its a medical index ? so the government should decide regardless of the medical index and how much is slightly over ?
sorry dude its a stupid and discriminatory idea from Cameron
and smacks of 1940 Germany where coincidently a person suffering from severe alcoholism may be also rendered incapable of procreation(sterilised)

slippery slope  

Not really stupid at all as you have a minimum amount of what is overweight which is a danger to the health of people which is very obvious, we are talking about being a quarter over or more your own body weight as a measure. So its not difficulty at all to base this from and not discrminating at all when people need to start helping themselves and just giving them benefits to further fuel this condition and they are not helping themselves is not helping them at all. Its nothing like Nazi Germany at all and doing nothing with those on benefits is just continuing to allow the problem to continue. I am all for more categories here also like I said with smoking and drinking.

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
they wanted to help the self`s that`s why they took part in the tv program

so what you seem to be saying  its ok to be fat if your not on benefits, regardless of the health implications yet people who are in work and fat still cost the NHS regardless if there in work or not
sorry IMO that`s just discrimination because your poor

I disagree as them wanting to help themselves as if they did they would be going in the right direction.
It could have easily been more about getting themselves on TV.
A person who recognises they have a problem takes the first step to help combating the problem, but it takes far more than that.
People in work who are fat are paying taxess though and even then I think companies should be doing far more to help combat this.
Its not discrmination, where if people need assistance and are being allowed to continue which is making their health worse then we are all letting them down. I am all for more things to be part of a condition of benefits, because they are there in the main to assist people back into work and if we can use an area to further help people, then that is an added incentive.


I would personally have a huge tax placed on sugar to make such sugary luxeries expensive.

incentive ? its hardly that its a punishment for non conformity using that descriptive water boarding is all so an "incentive"

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
yes its a medical index ? so the government should decide regardless of the medical index and how much is slightly over ?
sorry dude its a stupid and discriminatory idea from Cameron
and smacks of 1940 Germany where coincidently a person suffering from severe alcoholism may be also rendered incapable of procreation(sterilised)

slippery slope  

Not really stupid at all as you have a minimum amount of what is overweight which is a danger to the health of people which is very obvious, we are talking about being a quarter over or more your own body weight as a measure. So its not difficulty at all to base this from and not discrminating at all when people need to start helping themselves and just giving them benefits to further fuel this condition and they are not helping themselves is not helping them at all. Its nothing like Nazi Germany at all and doing nothing with those on benefits is just continuing to allow the problem to continue. I am all for more categories here also like I said with smoking and drinking.

we will just have to agree to disagree i am afraid

korban dallas wrote:

incentive ? its hardly that its a punishment for non conformity using that descriptive  water boarding is all so an "incentive"
I would personally have a huge tax placed on sugar to make such sugary luxeries expensive.

How is it a punishment when they need help and should be looking to helpn themselves.
All you are doing is excusing people to help themselves and allow the problem to exist.
Like I say I am all for companies to get on board and help people too, but this more than anything is a major health issue.
I already said I would place a huge amount of tax on sugar.
Again we into the realms of luxery items we in reality do not need

korban dallas wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Not really stupid at all as you have a minimum amount of what is overweight which is a danger to the health of people which is very obvious, we are talking about being a quarter over or more your own body weight as a measure. So its not difficulty at all to base this from and not discrminating at all when people need to start helping themselves and just giving them benefits to further fuel this condition and they are not helping themselves is not helping them at all. Its nothing like Nazi Germany at all and doing nothing with those on benefits is just continuing to allow the problem to continue. I am all for more categories here also like I said with smoking and drinking.

we will just have to agree to disagree i am afraid

No worries mate, hope you have a good day, have to crack on.

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:

incentive ? its hardly that its a punishment for non conformity using that descriptive  water boarding is all so an "incentive"
I would personally have a huge tax placed on sugar to make such sugary luxeries expensive.

How is it a punishment when they need help and should be looking to helpn themselves.
All you are doing is excusing people to help themselves and allow the problem to exist.
Like I say I am all for companies to get on board and help people too, but this more than anything is a major health issue.
I already said I would place a huge amount of tax on sugar.
Again we into the realms of luxery items we in reality do not need

hows it not a punishment ? The infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence.
the offence of being to fat

Cuchulain wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
we will just have to agree to disagree i am afraid

No worries mate, hope you have a good day, have to crack on.

L8R bud you too

korban dallas wrote:David Cameron will today launch review into cost of obesity and addiction
   The prime minister will pledge to make 'support and treatment' available
   But said he wanted to see more people 'coming off benefits and into work'

Obese people who refuse medical treatment to help them lose weight could have their benefits cut, the Prime Minister will announce today.

David Cameron will launch a review to work out the cost to taxpayers and the economy of 'preventable' conditions such as obesity and drug and alcohol addiction.

He has asked a government health adviser to examine plans to force people with health problems to undertake treatment when claiming benefits.
Mr Cameron will pledge to make 'support and treatment' available to those with drug and alcohol problems, and the obese, who want 'the opportunity to improve their lives'.

But he will add: 'We must look at what we do when people simply say no thanks and refuse that help but expect taxpayers to carry on funding their benefits.
Over the next five years I want to see many more people coming off sick benefit and into work.'
WAR ON SLEAZE? SEND FOR HOON

Disgraced former Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon watched as David Cameron gave a speech on tackling corruption yesterday.

Mr Hoon – one of the most senior politicians caught up in the ‘cash for access’ scandal in 2010 – was part of a UK trade delegation in Singapore.

The ex-Labour MP was filmed saying he expected £3,000 a day to help firms lobbying ministers. He is now a top manager at helicopter maker AgustaWestland. Mr Hoon’s appointment in 2011 caused disquiet as the firm had won a £1.7billion deal when he was Defence Secretary.

Around 90,000 people claiming sickness benefits, worth on average around £100 a week, whose primary condition is alcoholism or drug addiction could have their payments docked unless they agree to treatment. A further 1,800 receive incapacity benefit with the main reason listed as weight-related issues.

The claimants currently get offered treatment such as courses and medication to help them get better and back to work, but there is no legal requirement to accept the help.

Dame Carol Black, chairman of the Nuffield Trust and an adviser to the Department of Health, will today make an urgent call for evidence from experts and medical specialists before providing recommendations.

She said: 'Addiction to drugs and alcohol, and in some cases extreme obesity, can have a profoundly damaging impact on people's chances of taking up meaningful employment.

'By reviewing the support that is available here and abroad to people with these conditions, it is my hope that we can present a thorough analysis of the options available to Government. I am looking forward to discussing these issues with as many people as possible.'



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i guess he will be in favour of eugenics very soon

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11407747/Fat-genes-are-to-blame-for-a-fifth-of-obesity.html


Fat genes are to blame for more than a fifth of obesity meaning exercise and dieting are of little use to millions, a new study has found.

The landmark research, published in the journal Nature, is the most precise estimate yet for the percentage of obesity caused by DNA rather than lifestyle and is expected to fuel moves to categorise obesity as a disability.
--------------------------------------------------------------


this fucking government is getting beyond a joke more like 1940 germany that 2015 uk

Is there no end to their vileness! Next they will be saying those in wheelchairs should get up and walk.

Just when they are beginning to realise that being overweight is caused by so many things, even pollution and living on a busy road, the government comes out with a new target to pick on. Fascism is alive and well in Britain.

Plan to coerce addicts and obese people into treatment 'probably illegal' says Tory health chair

Sarah Woolaston, chair of the Health Select Committee said plans to deny benefits to people who refused treatment were "highly misguided"

A plan to deny addicts and obese people benefits if they refuse treatment are 'probably illegal' according to the Tory chair of the Health Select Committee.

A review into whether whether people suffering long-term, but treatable conditions should be deprived of benefits if they don't accept government help was launched today.

The inquiry, to be completed by the end of the year by Dame Carol Black, was promised by David Cameron before the election, and was initially only intended to include the obese.

Now the review has been extended to include people with alcohol and drug dependency.

But Tory MP Sarah Wollaston, a former GP who now chairs the Commons health committee, said:

"It's a fundamental principle of medical consent that it should be fully informed and freely given.

"This is a form of coercion and I thinks that ethically unacceptable.

"It would be very difficult for a doctor to take part in treating a patient without valid consent. This would invalidate their consent.

"Any doctor taking part in this programme with someone not there voluntary would be in breach of some very fundamental principles of consent. It would probably be illegal.

"And also it would not be effective. Coerced treatments tend not to work. And it would take up places on these very important treatment programmes from people who do want to be there.

"So I think this particular issue about coercion should be utterly rejected.

"The idea that somehow you can force someone through a coercive treatment programme is highly misguided."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/plan-coerce-addicts-obese-people-6158326?utm_content=buffer5ed13&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Honestly, doesn't the idjit talk to his ministers before gobbing off?

Force?
I would call it a no brainer that they seek help, being as they have conditions that require medical assistance.
What is the alternative?
Do nothing and these people continue to suffer.
That is ever worse and I do not find this forcing but ensuring people seek the help they need.

Hmmm well I'm not sure there are such things as "fat genes", it's another topic probably but I think this "blame genes" thing is a copout.

If someone is so completely overweight they cannot work then they should seek help! Whether it's genetic or not (not, in my opinion), is no excuse!

I have a thyroid condition which is in remission at the moment - I know that at any given moment it can recur and one of the side effects historically for me, is gaining weight.
Guess what? I'll watch what I eat if it happens and maintain my own body.

Why can't other people do that if they know:

1 they are predisposed through genetics, to gain weight
2 they cannot work or live a proper life

The help is available if they want it.
Unfortunately, you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

Cuchulain wrote:Sorry Korben I am all for this and the same should be applied to smokers and drinkers.You want benefits, then you look to see help to quit smoking and if you have a drink problem.
Many people are in poor health because of food, smoking and drinking and its time people placed their health as a priority. It does not matter if genetic or not, they still require needing assistance for this condition which Alcoholism is a condition also.

why should someone who smokes but has no health/work related issues with that that be forced to quit on pain of having benefits stopped?
thats not governing, thats dictating.

just because you look down on people that smoke perhaps?

how about we say the same for the coffee junkies (and there are plenty)

in fact why dont you just come out and say it....

put those on benefits into barracks or even prison camps , where they are subject to total control over their lives, hell you could even brainwash them with tory propaganda.


And dont come the old chestnut of why not just give em everything for nothing...thats crap and you know it....

Some will benefit and Should benefit from the necessary guidance and help, some wont....BUT what you going to do...

mass testing for the smokers and mass "weigh ins" for the obese?

some 0on here calim you can feed your family for tuppence a week (and have change for the electricity and gas )

BUT I defy anyone to feed their family a TRUELY healthy diet on benefit payments, especially JSA.

cheap meat ...usually very fatty and stringy
cheap veg poor in nutritional value as its generally "beyond" its best, wilted and generally "sad"
cheap pasta/ rice etc loads of carbs and sod all else....


and the problem


greedy suppliers....

often run by or even owned by extremely rich fat cats.....

who in turn make or have made for them legislation to prevent others "by passing" this evil circle....

example....


I can pass my excess rabbits onto a butcher (in fur ONLY) at whatever price he is willing to pay

I CANNOT sell them to joe public as "meat" without expensive licences and certification

yet not so may years ago this was common....and people didnt die of belly ache from THAT source so WTF

of course I CAN give away" limited quantities" to friends and family.....

Its insane....

eddie wrote:Hmmm well I'm not sure there are such things as "fat genes", it's another topic probably but I think this "blame genes" thing is a copout.

read second link in first post

If someone is so completely overweight they cannot work then they should seek help! Whether it's genetic or not (not, in my opinion), is no excuse!

No argument

I have a thyroid condition which is in remission at the moment - I know that at any given moment it can recur and one of the side effects historically for me, is gaining weight.
Guess what? I'll watch what I eat if it happens and maintain my own body.

I did mention that in one of my posts

Why can't other people do that if they know:

1 they are predisposed through genetics, to gain weight
2 they cannot work or live a proper life

1 gene knowledge is in the infancy stage
2 many obese people live a happy life regardless of whether there on benefit or not

The help is available if they want it.
Unfortunately, you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

and to be honest this is about if people should have benefit sanctions imposed on them because to government deems it because there fat ,as i mentioned obesity costs whether your on benefit or not and i suspect the number who can`t work because of there weight is very low anyway and is just IMO anouther attack on a vulnerable group as seems the main target of the tory`s

i would like to see the same outrage and condemnation for people claiming £200 a day to walk 200 yards but i see very little condemnation of that or government intervention because that`s like turkeys voting for Christmas

this govenment is all about the rich people paying the middle class people to blame the poor and less well of as usual

victorismyhero wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:Sorry Korben I am all for this and the same should be applied to smokers and drinkers.You want benefits, then you look to see help to quit smoking and if you have a drink problem.
Many people are in poor health because of food, smoking and drinking and its time people placed their health as a priority. It does not matter if genetic or not, they still require needing assistance for this condition which Alcoholism is a condition also.

why should someone who smokes but has no health/work related issues with that that be forced to quit on pain of having benefits stopped?
thats not governing, thats dictating.

just because you look down on people that smoke perhaps?

how about we say the same for the coffee junkies (and there are plenty)

in fact why dont you just come out and say it....

put those on benefits into barracks or even prison camps , where they are subject to total control over their lives, hell  you could even brainwash them with tory propaganda.


And dont come the old chestnut of why not just give em everything for nothing...thats crap and you know it....

Some will benefit and Should benefit from the necessary guidance and help, some wont....BUT what you going to do...

mass testing for the smokers and mass "weigh ins" for the obese?

some 0on here calim you can feed your family for tuppence a week (and have change for the electricity and gas   )

BUT   I defy anyone to feed their family a TRUELY healthy diet on benefit payments, especially JSA.

cheap meat ...usually very fatty and stringy
cheap veg poor in nutritional value as its generally "beyond" its best, wilted and generally "sad"
cheap pasta/ rice etc loads of carbs and sod all else....


and the problem


greedy suppliers....

often run by or even owned by extremely rich fat cats.....

who in turn make or have made for them legislation to prevent others "by passing" this evil circle....

example....


I can pass my excess rabbits onto a butcher (in fur ONLY) at whatever price he is willing to pay

I CANNOT sell them to joe public as "meat" without expensive licences and certification

yet not so may years ago this was common....and people didnt die of belly ache from THAT source so WTF

of course I CAN give away" limited quantities" to friends and family.....

Its insane....

Well said mate


roll on the master race EH!!

In conjunction with a PROPERLY CONTROLLED AND OVERSEEN campaign of help and assistance, which SHOULD BE LIMITED to psychological help and KNOWN SAFE medication ONLY (NO ENFORCED "gastric bands or other surgery(did you think that would be ruled out? pfffft) lets be honest something else is needed

so

a harsh and rapidly increasing (in relation to the fat content) rate of taxation on "fast food"

the same applied directly to the profits of fast food companies (which they will be prevented from passing on to the customer)

AND a similar tax applied directly to the CEO and board members of said companies on their earnings

Tax the hell out of chocolate and other sweets.....

and crisps

and sugary drinks....

(oh and ban all drinks with artifical sweetners....these things cause near as much obesity as anything else)

reason.....you drink a drink with artificial sweetener your body says YUM ...sugar....

then it goes WTF.....I'VE BEEN CHEATED

then it goes right yer git .....NOW I AM HUNGRY>>>>FEEED ME.....and people do......

bring back "proper" PE in schools...with proper EX PTI PE teachers, the ones that terrified generations of idle school kids) 1Hr 45mins a week of PE we had...all on one afternoon...A cross country run of 6 miles plus a game of football or rugby in winter

or a gym session follwed by hocky or athletics in the summer

and one term a year had swimming.....

Get rid of shit food! Grow products here and stop importing!

As for obese people on benefits - I do t see any reason why they cannot be put on a programme and shown to be trying to lose weight.

Not sure really, about stopping benefits? How are they going to tell if the obese person has been trying to lose weight? By having a weigh-in every fortnight?
How embarrassing for that person!!

victorismyhero wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:Sorry Korben I am all for this and the same should be applied to smokers and drinkers.You want benefits, then you look to see help to quit smoking and if you have a drink problem.
Many people are in poor health because of food, smoking and drinking and its time people placed their health as a priority. It does not matter if genetic or not, they still require needing assistance for this condition which Alcoholism is a condition also.

why should someone who smokes but has no health/work related issues with that that be forced to quit on pain of having benefits stopped?
thats not governing, thats dictating.

just because you look down on people that smoke perhaps?

how about we say the same for the coffee junkies (and there are plenty)

in fact why dont you just come out and say it....

put those on benefits into barracks or even prison camps , where they are subject to total control over their lives, hell  you could even brainwash them with tory propaganda.


And dont come the old chestnut of why not just give em everything for nothing...thats crap and you know it....

Some will benefit and Should benefit from the necessary guidance and help, some wont....BUT what you going to do...

mass testing for the smokers and mass "weigh ins" for the obese?

some 0on here calim you can feed your family for tuppence a week (and have change for the electricity and gas   )

BUT   I defy anyone to feed their family a TRUELY healthy diet on benefit payments, especially JSA.

cheap meat ...usually very fatty and stringy
cheap veg poor in nutritional value as its generally "beyond" its best, wilted and generally "sad"
cheap pasta/ rice etc loads of carbs and sod all else....


and the problem


greedy suppliers....

often run by or even owned by extremely rich fat cats.....

who in turn make or have made for them legislation to prevent others "by passing" this evil circle....

example....


I can pass my excess rabbits onto a butcher (in fur ONLY) at whatever price he is willing to pay

I CANNOT sell them to joe public as "meat" without expensive licences and certification

yet not so may years ago this was common....and people didnt die of belly ache from THAT source so WTF

of course I CAN give away" limited quantities" to friends and family.....

Its insane....

1) Why should they be given money to continue a habbit that dramatically effects their lungs?
This is about them receiving benefits to get back into work, of which smoking is not a necessity, so I find the view they should use money then  poorly to pay for a bad habbit is utterly wrong on every level.

2) I smoked for many years myself, I do not look down on those who  can afford to smoke, it is their choice, one tthey pay for with their own money, so I fail to see why money for benefits should go towards an uncessary habbit.

3) Coffee is a luxery again, am happy this is also stopped

4) Absurd point about prisons, this is about money as benefits to help people back into work, not feed luxery items they do not need.

5) You forget I come from a very large family that spent very little money well and we all had food on the table. In fact my father used to smoke until he could not afford to do so anymore. Again you are excusing people to continue having items they do not need, which is the point here. Now if people are using these benefits to items they do not need above food, then that isw fundementally wrong on every level.

6) If I had my way people would be given the majority of benefits in food vouchers, with enough to need to any travel expenses. People just on normal benefits normally reside with someone else, otherwise they get other benefits.

Oh and given the astounding ability of doctors to be able to diagnose exremely fit people as obese
(remember the rugby playing kid??? whos pparents got a nasty letter abiout their sone being "obese...when in fact he was actually built like a brick khazi?)

(remember that athlete that was diagnosed obese)

and of course dont forget that BMI is a garbage measurement that means NOTHING...thats right...nothing at all...

It was designed for a very SPECIFIC population (the Finns???????) and its originator disclaims its use for anything else.

not to mention it doesnt actually work....

By BMI....I am reconed to be "mildly obese" BUT I bet I'm fitter than a lot of you on here (despite being older than most too....)

bear in mind when I'm out shooting I am walking up to 10 miles a day
and carrying up to 30 lbs of gear

if I'm hide shooting I could have to walk up to a mile carrying 50 lbs of kit...
(or alternately walk 4 miles 2 of which I'm carrying 25lbs of kit)


and moreover whilst being morbidly obese is obvioulsy a heath risk, medical opinion is coming down fimly on the side of us slightly portly types being healthier than all them skin and bones types

BMI is bullshit is it? Hahahaha not surprised

And you lot wonder why I have no faith in scientists

Cuchulain wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:

why should someone who smokes but has no health/work related issues with that that be forced to quit on pain of having benefits stopped?
thats not governing, thats dictating.

just because you look down on people that smoke perhaps?

how about we say the same for the coffee junkies (and there are plenty)

in fact why dont you just come out and say it....

put those on benefits into barracks or even prison camps , where they are subject to total control over their lives, hell  you could even brainwash them with tory propaganda.


And dont come the old chestnut of why not just give em everything for nothing...thats crap and you know it....

Some will benefit and Should benefit from the necessary guidance and help, some wont....BUT what you going to do...

mass testing for the smokers and mass "weigh ins" for the obese?

some 0on here calim you can feed your family for tuppence a week (and have change for the electricity and gas   )

BUT   I defy anyone to feed their family a TRUELY healthy diet on benefit payments, especially JSA.

cheap meat ...usually very fatty and stringy
cheap veg poor in nutritional value as its generally "beyond" its best, wilted and generally "sad"
cheap pasta/ rice etc loads of carbs and sod all else....


and the problem


greedy suppliers....

often run by or even owned by extremely rich fat cats.....

who in turn make or have made for them legislation to prevent others "by passing" this evil circle....

example....


I can pass my excess rabbits onto a butcher (in fur ONLY) at whatever price he is willing to pay

I CANNOT sell them to joe public as "meat" without expensive licences and certification

yet not so may years ago this was common....and people didnt die of belly ache from THAT source so WTF

of course I CAN give away" limited quantities" to friends and family.....

Its insane....

1) Why should they be given money to continue a habbit that dramatically effects their lungs?
This is about them receiving benefits to get back into work, of which smoking is not a necessity, so I find the view they should use money then  poorly to pay for a bad habbit is utterly wrong on every level.

2) I smoked for many years myself, I do not look down on those who  can afford to smoke, it is their choice, one tthey pay for with their own money, so I fail to see why money for benefits should go towards an uncessary habbit.

3) Coffee is a luxery again, am happy this is also stopped

4) Absurd point about prisons, this is about money as benefits to help people back into work, not feed luxery items they do not need.

5) You forget I come from a very large family that spent very little money well and we all had food on the table. In fact my father used to smoke until he could not afford to do so anymore. Again you are excusing people to continue having items they do not need, which is the point here. Now if people are using these benefits to items they do not need above food, then that isw fundementally wrong on every level.

6) If I had my way people would be given the majority of benefits in food vouchers, with enough to need to any travel expenses. People just on normal benefits normally reside with someone else, otherwise they get other benefits.

So we are only going to "give them what they NEED" eh?

who decides then what is need?

an 8x6 pen with bread and soup once a day perhaps and a couple of hours "volunteering" for some rock breaking, or working on the masters plantation?

when govt starts to involve itself in this sort of thinking...its about time it was closed down.

what next ...enforced celibacy or enforced sterilisation or enforced pill taking to make sure they dont have kids...

when shall we apply this? immediately on becomming redundant.....after 6 months? (ooops thats too late she's already up the duff with another parasite) a year?

eddie wrote:BMI is bullshit is it? Hahahaha not surprised

And you lot wonder why I have no faith in scientists

actually Eddie ...its not the scientists..the guy that developed it is quite specific about its correct use

Its the doctors and those with an "interest" in it all that are as usual misuseing it ...because it pays...

For the puropose it was developed it is apparntly a good guide...out side of that it is an abject failure

Would anybody think this plan is fair when you take into consideration that among dieters, only 3 percent are able to lose weight and keep it off for more than three years?

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/03/diets_do_not_work_the_thin_evidence_that_losing_weight_makes_you_healthier.html