At least there, bothering to alter terms. Probably because the false consciousness was being rumbled.
Not yet with a current favourite, invoking terrorism.
"Obesity is a bigger cost for Britain than war and terror." 20 November 2014
Really? That's funny because;
"Obesity more dangerous than terrorism: experts. The Age- 25 February 2008
"Obesity, bigger threat than terrorism?" CBS- 1 March 2006
The guardian itself; [US] "Obesity epidemic, bigger threat than terrorism?" 3 March 2006
Now this terrible scourge....................... of hackdrivel has caught up with poor old Blighty. 'Twas inevitable. There's been a lumbering up to this one as crude as the bluntest filled-with-visceral-horror stereotype of a fat person on the move.
Most of the above is attributed to one Richard Carmona, an ex-US surgeon general. He exited his post on 31 July 2007. All this was so compelling that it took a while for the press to get excited. Perhaps they knew b/s when they smelt it?
In the end though, the press give the
So what are we to make of this
It says it has evidence for 44 interventions, into the lives of people out of 70 something they considered *gulp*, being acceptable. Eurgh.When a person has to do that many things to do something your body does automatically, you know it's about the approach, the intervention/s.
Self named a "discussion paper", it majors on the usual fat people as other. A cost burden- though by that same posit, slim people could be deemed other and a cost to fat/ter people.
Not right now though, the establishment is leading this "discussion" [euphemism for not one]. And though the evidence is that men in many countries, men tend to have a more uniform spread of weight across class, than women, [though we're continually told they're making inroads.]
This adds up to slimness as default human. What do all these f-a-t establishment figures think whilst going along with this? Do they think they aren't fat? Is their fatness somehow obviated by wealth/influence? Does the old saying "You can never be to rich or too thin" need a re-work to something like "You can never truly be an 'obese' if you're rich?"/ "The 'obese' mask cannot rest on the face of a rich man?"
A lot of the powers that be and their cronies are receiving more and more money for this old rope. 'obese' is really just an entry point for other things. Consisting increasingly in sticking its nose in your beeswax, ordering you around, telling you exactly how to live and what to do with your free time. What am I talking about "free time" do you think you have any?
Time belongs to the man! What would Einstein say?
Invasive lifestyle management, mental re-adjustment-to sustain anorexic behaviours, finally admitted to require jettisoning the mental drain that was the 'obese' persona imposed on fat people. "We're all be 'obese' by the year 20 whatever" now reveals a new undercurrent of meaning. Wishful thinking.
When people are 'obese' they can lose their sense of self. They will take the kind of orders they otherwise wouldn't dream of. If you're goal was power, would you be "incentivized" to turn society's weight around? 'Obeses' are ideal citizenry, trusting, docile, obedient-grateful.
It's funny isn't it? We went along with we must become slim. Slim people went along with being part of enforcing this. And now we may all go down together tethered to this boat.
Pills, anti-seizure meds, operations to remove stomachs. Assessing, controlling people's lives to a tee from cradle to grave, with the threat of this or death penalty. By the time people see through this, goodness knows how much they'll have made away with. Or what will be left of our sense of self or freedom or even healthcare.
PTB are like petty criminals, opportunist to a fault.
Now when you hear "obesity costs", you know you're hearing the kind of cash they intend to drain out of healthcare in order to "save" healthcare expenditure or even whole systems. The NHS is having trouble not because of political re-arranging with every change of government, or the inflexible practise of a stiff medical hierarchy, but because too many of us are ovah-whait;
The UK spends less than £638m a year on obesity prevention programmes – about 1% of the social cost, the study finds.That much? I wonder what on? Certainly not to find out ways of say blocking people's bodies from scaling whatever highest heights they happen to be triggered into. Or simply trying to stabilise people's weight, rather than operate and remove their organs, under the ransom of continued gain and/or actual health problems.
Despite there already being more leads than many imagine. Its like any "sin", the lack of answer is not a reading of the state of our knowledge, it's rough justice for the "sinners."
As I always said, there is no objective evidence that this particular crusade is that invested in reducing people's weight. It's more into setting up the idea that your life is not your own. Starting with casting bodies as disease and de-animating fat people, defining us as non-sentient fat suits.
Whether this ownership comes through religion, politics or healthcare? Who cares? The same classes run them all-till they lose power. Fat people are simply a current conduit for this kind of impulse.
So, we ought to be pissing away more resources even more uselessly down the drain? And the people like these report writers, medical professionals, nutritionists, psychiatrists, social workers everyone's out for a bit of this, can get paid to tell us to do what we've already done under our own initiative, in the guise "personal responsibility."
Now laughable including taking pills and being operated on to reduce the function of your functioning body. Since when is the surgery arm of the medical machine "personal"?
Despite no evidence of dead fat bodies littering the streets, nor even of life expectancy regressing a la their ceaseless so-called predictions.