c4countdown

This topic is for discussing news and current affairs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12287880

Clearly the biggest story at the moment is the fact that some people are too fat to fit in normal ambulances. New "bariatric" ambulances are having to be made at a cost of around £90,000 because obese people need things like reinforced stretchers, hoists and special cushions (£2500 a pop). I don't know why but this made me really angry and what made me get even more angry was that an obese woman was interviewed on BBC Breakfast this morning arguing that ambulance fleets should have these "bariatric" ambulances and that it is their problem rather than her own fatty problem for making herself fat in the first place by placing too much food in her fat mouth. I honestly could not believe what I was hearing from this fat, choolate-craving gob.

Somebody please tell me that I'm the stupid one and that this fat woman is right about her being entitled to these pimped out Fatmobiles.

Oh, and there's a minor scuffle going on in Cairo or something.

Everything should be made for dwarves so that the likes of me and you can never take part Ryan.

Watched BBC News 24 earlier to see what was up in the world, and turned on to hear 'The people of Cairo are wielding golf clubs in defence'.

Some fat woman rang up Radio 2 this morning about this as well, it was kind of funny because the presenter kept edging towards saying "yeah, but maybe people shouldn't be so fat?", it was an interesting conversational game to listen to.

Trouble is, if you say "we shouldn't pay for x because it's your own fault if you're fat" then where do you stop?

Joseph Krol wrote:Watched BBC News 24 earlier to see what was up in the world, and turned on to hear 'The people of Cairo are wielding golf clubs in defence'.

*yIELDing

Michael Wallace wrote:Trouble is, if you say "we shouldn't pay for x because it's your own fault if you're fat" then where do you stop?

OK yeah I can see the point with this e.g. people in wheelchairs etc. but they really can't help being in a wheelchair. What I could not stand is that this woman was so adamant that she was right and didn't at once stop and consider that perhaps she was the problem. Has it scientifically been proven that being fat is genetic...I doubt it. At least some part of it is self-control over diet so in this particular case I'm honestly of the viewpoint that she (and others of this view) should get up off their arse (she was even sat down in the interview) and do something about it.

Ryan Taylor wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Trouble is, if you say "we shouldn't pay for x because it's your own fault if you're fat" then where do you stop?

OK yeah I can see the point with this e.g. people in wheelchairs etc. but they really can't help being in a wheelchair.

Well it's not really that, do you deny people treatment for AIDS if they got it because they had sex without a condom? What if you break your leg playing football?

Michael Wallace wrote:

Ryan Taylor wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Trouble is, if you say "we shouldn't pay for x because it's your own fault if you're fat" then where do you stop?

OK yeah I can see the point with this e.g. people in wheelchairs etc. but they really can't help being in a wheelchair.

Well it's not really that, do you deny people treatment for AIDS if they got it because they had sex without a condom? What if you break your leg playing football?

And on the other hand, it's well-established that obesity does have a genetic component, plus there are diseases (eg hypothyroidism) which cause obesity.

Michael Wallace wrote:

Ryan Taylor wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Trouble is, if you say "we shouldn't pay for x because it's your own fault if you're fat" then where do you stop?

OK yeah I can see the point with this e.g. people in wheelchairs etc. but they really can't help being in a wheelchair.

Well it's not really that, do you deny people treatment for AIDS if they got it because they had sex without a condom? What if you break your leg playing football?

Hmmm I wouldn't, no. But that's because in my head I see these situations differently (contracting HIV/AIDS and being too fat for an ambulance). Like, it would be far easier to realise that you were suddenly getting to a point where your weight was becoming a problem and to do something about it rather than (I imagine!) having unprotected sex. Don't get the broken leg bit, but I once broke my shoulder playing football and was whisked away in ambulance to the hospital and treated. I was entitled to that.

Charlie Reams wrote:And on the other hand, it's well-established that obesity does have a genetic component, plus there are diseases (eg hypothyroidism) which cause obesity.

Yeah a component, like you say, rather than solely being genetic which is the bit that I don't get...why can't they just try their hardest to get fat?

Ryan Taylor wrote: Hmmm I wouldn't, no. But that's because in my head I see these situations differently (contracting HIV/AIDS and being too fat for an ambulance). Like, it would be far easier to realise that you were suddenly getting to a point where your weight was becoming a problem and to do something about it rather than (I imagine!) having unprotected sex. Don't get the broken leg bit, but I once broke my shoulder playing football and was whisked away in ambulance to the hospital and treated. I was entitled to that.

The point is: once you withdraw medical help from fat people because it's their fault for being fat, then you should also withdraw medical help from people who, say, break their leg playing football because it's their fault for playing football. If anything the latter is less defensible because everyone has to eat, whereas not everyone has to play football. And of course this is ridiculous because everything you do (including nothing) carries a risk.

(And also it's not necessarily their fault for being fat, see above.)

Cancer patients who contracted through smoking is a classic. And to go further, my granddad died from lung cancer contracted through passive smoking playing saxophone in jazz clubs, never smoked in his life but it was still "his fault".

Charlie Reams wrote:The point is: once you withdraw medical help from fat people because it's their fault for being fat, then you should also withdraw medical help from people who, say, break their leg playing football because it's their fault for playing football. If anything the latter is less defensible because everyone has to eat, whereas not everyone has to play football. And of course this is ridiculous because everything you do (including nothing) carries a risk.

(And also it's not necessarily their fault for being fat, see above.)

This is just bullshit, not what you're saying but how things like this work because I can see that this stands as fact, I just can't face it. What would have to be done for society to say "no" to fat people?

There's certainly some evidence for obesity being genetic, although since factors are usually compounded by eating habits learned by parents it's not clear-cut. Leptin's usually held up as being the chief culprit but there are certainly other hormonal controls for diet, appetite and activity levels. Evolutionarily it makes sense that people who stored energy most successfully in times where food resources were scarce would have been the most successful to pass on their genes to the next generation.

Hypothyroidism's interesting because not only are you incapable of as much physical activity but you're constantly craving carbohydrates and high-energy foods as your body believes you're short on energy, whereas you're just not metabolizing it correctly. (I got diagnosed with hypothyroidism a year ago and amongst other things it causes wildly swinging apterous performances ) After I had a new liver I lost four stone in a week - literally. I went from a size 16 back to a size 8 in the space of 6 days.

There's still a definite truth tho that you're responsible for your own health and what you put in your mouth. Just because you have a genetic propensity to put on weight doesn't mean you should have free license to stuff yourself with crap constantly, and if you know you're a more natural pear shape for example maybe it just means you should work harder at maintaining a healthy weight. Bad luck and all that but I guess it's only the same as thicker people needing to work harder to achieve academically.

Topical tune

Ryan Taylor wrote:This is just bullshit, not what you're saying but how things like this work because I can see that this stands as fact, I just can't face it.

So just to confirm, you concede that I'm right but you still don't agree? Haha, not really sure how to counter that. If you want to take the argument one step further, we also give medical treatment to criminals, even for injuries sustained during the crime, and most of them have done something more heinous than gorging on kebabs. And we also treat people who've overdosed on illegal drugs or whatever. So presumably you'd have to be against those cases too, which strikes me as a little uncivilized.

Ryan Taylor wrote:What would have to be done for society to say "no" to fat people?

I'm sure it would be at least as effective as society saying no to homosexuality or drugs.

Lesley Hines wrote:There's still a definite truth tho that you're responsible for your own health and what you put in your mouth. Just because you have a genetic propensity to put on weight doesn't mean you should have free license to stuff yourself with crap constantly, and if you know you're a more natural pear shape for example maybe it just means you should work harder at maintaining a healthy weight.

Agreed. What I'm saying (and I think you agree) is that you should still give fat people medical treatment if they need it. Which doesn't mean that being fat is to be encouraged.

Possibly the fat people are right. People are getting fatter, it can't be denied, and maybe it is time to change how things are made. Most things would need to be made bigger to reflect the burgeoning obesity of the population, but that's got to be easier than somehow making people less obese.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Ryan Taylor wrote:This is just bullshit, not what you're saying but how things like this work because I can see that this stands as fact, I just can't face it.

So just to confirm, you concede that I'm right but you still don't agree?

Yep. What you're saying is right but wrong if that makes sense.

Charlie Reams wrote:If you want to take the argument one step further, we also give medical treatment to criminals, even for injuries sustained during the crime, and most of them have done something more heinous than gorging on kebabs. And we also treat people who've overdosed on illegal drugs or whatever. So presumably you'd have to be against those cases too, which strikes me as a little uncivilized.

Yeah I am against those cases, particularly the first point.

Ryan Taylor wrote:What would have to be done for society to say "no" to fat people?

Charlie Reams wrote:I'm sure it would be at least as effective as society saying no to homosexuality or drugs.

This is just an assault on fat people, don't bring homosexuals into it because then I look like a bad person.

I think I've learnt that I would probably be a bad person to run a country.

Ryan Taylor wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:If you want to take the argument one step further, we also give medical treatment to criminals, even for injuries sustained during the crime, and most of them have done something more heinous than gorging on kebabs. And we also treat people who've overdosed on illegal drugs or whatever. So presumably you'd have to be against those cases too, which strikes me as a little uncivilized.

Yeah I am against those cases, particularly the first point.

This is also bizarre in various ways but given that you're apparently not one to be cowed by logic then there doesn't seem much point enumerating them!

It makes me so angry that NHS services are designed to cater for their patients.

Ben Hunter wrote:It makes me so angry that NHS services are designed to cater for their patients.

Fuck you all.

I blame the Daily Mail.

Michael Wallace wrote:I blame the Daily Mail.

I do too. I wouldn't have these views if I read the Guardian.

I actually 100% sympathise with Ryan on this. I know it's wrong but I can't help being innately "against" fat people in the same way that I imagine racists are against browns and that and homophobes are against sherlock holmes. I'm fattist.

Being fat is a bit like Countdown ability. You might have some natural talent (e.g. underactive thyroid) but the top performers (proper obese jerks) still need to put in the hours to achieve such a high standard (of heaviness).

I don't think I need a big ambulance but I wouldn't be able to slip through a small hole.

oh... topical... sorry.

Michael Wallace wrote:Some fat woman rang up Radio 2 this morning about this as well, it was kind of funny because the presenter kept edging towards saying "yeah, but maybe people shouldn't be so fat?", it was an interesting conversational game to listen to.

If you mean the woman who was interviewed on the Jeremy Vine programme, that was Sue Sanders.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Some fat woman rang up Radio 2 this morning about this as well, it was kind of funny because the presenter kept edging towards saying "yeah, but maybe people shouldn't be so fat?", it was an interesting conversational game to listen to.

If you mean the woman who was interviewed on the Jeremy Vine programme, that was Sue Sanders.

*Not sure if serious pic*

Fair play to whoever it was for being able to ring in though, they must have one of those special dialling wands

Jon Corby wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Some fat woman rang up Radio 2 this morning about this as well, it was kind of funny because the presenter kept edging towards saying "yeah, but maybe people shouldn't be so fat?", it was an interesting conversational game to listen to.

If you mean the woman who was interviewed on the Jeremy Vine programme, that was Sue Sanders.

*Not sure if serious pic*

Fair play to whoever it was for being able to ring in though, they must have one of those special dialling wands

Perfectly serious. She didn't ring the programme in fact - she was interviewed in the studio (well, a studio in Canterbury).

You can hear the interview online - it starts around 37 minutes into the programme.

It's unfortunate that she keeps claiming to be a confident person (which she is) but says "um" an awful lot which slightly undermines her case.

Listening again (TM) it's amusing to hear Jeremy Vine (who as we already know is master of the unfortunate spoonerism) narrowly managing to avoid referring to "the hate/white ratio".

*backs quietly out of thread*

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Some fat woman rang up Radio 2 this morning about this as well, it was kind of funny because the presenter kept edging towards saying "yeah, but maybe people shouldn't be so fat?", it was an interesting conversational game to listen to.

If you mean the woman who was interviewed on the Jeremy Vine programme, that was Sue Sanders.

Haha. Explains a lot.

I wish Sue was still here, because I'm kinda curious now how somebody ends up being sat in a radio studio being interviewed about being fat. Is she registered somewhere as being available to chat about a selection of subjects? Did they put out some kind of advertisement/appeal the previous day? Or do they just lay a trail of doughnuts leading from the pavement up into the studio and then sit back and wait?

Jon Corby wrote:I wish Sue was still here, because I'm kinda curious now how somebody ends up being sat in a radio studio being interviewed about being fat. Is she registered somewhere as being available to chat about a selection of subjects? Did they put out some kind of advertisement/appeal the previous day? Or do they just lay a trail of doughnuts leading from the pavement up into the studio and then sit back and wait?

I really need to fix Likes.

So the big news of today is undoubtedly this. I'm proud to say I know him.

Ryan Taylor wrote:So the big news of today is undoubtedly this. I'm proud to say I know him.

Why did he do it? Was he too fat to run away without paying in the traditional sense so he wanted to get a headstart before the taxi stopped?

Matt Morrison wrote:

Ryan Taylor wrote:So the big news of today is undoubtedly this. I'm proud to say I know him.

Why did he do it? Was he too fat to run away without paying in the traditional sense so he wanted to get a headstart before the taxi stopped?

No idea, he's still in hospital. And is that the wrong 'were' that has been used? Only in Hull.

Ryan Taylor wrote:And is that the wrong 'were' that has been used? Only in Hull.

Too right it's only in Hull. Everywhere else they're different words

Phil Reynolds wrote:You can hear the interview online - it starts around 37 minutes into the programme.

Cheers for posting this - I hadn't heard it. Towards the end of the programme they read out a comment that said something along the lines of "I'm 38 stone and I pay my taxes...". Sue said she's a size 18 which is only one size above the national average for women, so maybe she's got a more valid point. You can be 15 stone without being obese in any way. 38 stone tho is abnormally large and it's not fair to demand that the whole of society bow to the exception. It's a shame they can't go into what life circumstances have led him to be that size, because the comment certainly left me feeling angry and judgmental.

Can't believe with all the amazing new music that never gets played that they're still playing Gilbert O'Sullivan on the BBC. Actually makes me angry.

I had a taxi journey with a Pakistani driver the yesterday who was really concerned about this Raymond Davis dude situation. He said his channel from home is reporting that he in fact shot the two people in the back (even though he claims self defence) and that the US are lying about him being a diplomat. The Pakistanis want to kill him back and apparently America might get shirty. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12305049

Hah.. still have that show playing... I know it's awful to be laughing, but the 'they just didn't have a fridge big enough for him' line about the dead fat guy is really funny!

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Some fat woman rang up Radio 2 this morning about this as well, it was kind of funny because the presenter kept edging towards saying "yeah, but maybe people shouldn't be so fat?", it was an interesting conversational game to listen to.

If you mean the woman who was interviewed on the Jeremy Vine programme, that was Sue Sanders.

Blimey, it's a small world! So no room for fatties.

Anyone else see the story about the council who want to use the heat from a crematorium to heat a neighbouring swimming pool. Apparently people were outraged. I don't get what the big deal is. Two birds one stone makes sense to me. People are overly sensitive with the dead if you ask me. Sorry there's no link, I saw it on sky's teletext.

Mark James wrote:Anyone else see the story about the council who want to use the heat from a crematorium to heat a neighbouring swimming pool. Apparently people were outraged. I don't get what the big deal is. Two birds one stone makes sense to me. People are overly sensitive with the dead if you ask me. Sorry there's no link, I saw it on sky's teletext.

Completely agree with you.

Mark James wrote:Anyone else see the story about the council who want to use the heat from a crematorium to heat a neighbouring swimming pool. Apparently people were outraged. I don't get what the big deal is. Two birds one stone makes sense to me. People are overly sensitive with the dead if you ask me. Sorry there's no link, I saw it on sky's teletext.

If it was the body of me or someone I'd know, I'd think it was proper awesome that some good had come of it.

Peter Mabey wrote:http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... S_20110204

More space in that sense would be better alright. Fat people, move to the countryside. Could you harness much power off an exercise bike, if you rode it for, say 30 minutes?

Michael Wallace wrote:I blame the Daily Mail.

Indeed. Because 50% of the population are of above average weight, which is clearly disastrous and completely unexpected, especially if the 'average' used is the median.

Oliver Garner wrote:Indeed. Because 50% of the population are of above average weight, which is clearly disastrous and completely unexpected, especially if the 'average' used is the median.

If 50% of the population are above average weight, and 50% below average weight, does that mean that no-one is average weight? (I speak as someone who failed A-level maths, and never did statistics, because I was supposed to be good at maths, so went into the top set in 6th form, so did pure & applied.)

This reminds me of the news reported several years ago that a third of schoolchildren were below average ability in maths. I think that the Department of Education were hoping that all children would be above average.

Where did all this statistical stuff come from anyway? Obesity isn't defined relative to the population. Actually it is defined relative to the size of the average planet though.

Sorry to change the topic but apparently Osama Bin Laden has been assassinated. Discuss.

Joseph Krol wrote:Sorry to change the topic but apparently Osama Bin Laden has been assassinated. Discuss.

Yeah pretty historic day really and I found out it had happened through facebook as is usually the case. I'm just letting BBC discuss it for me but right now they have a mother of a 7/7 victim on who is clearly loving the fact that he is dead because she is vengeful. Bit mental how everyone is celebrating the death of someone, he is only a human like everyone else after, but then I guess what he did in his lifetime was wrong so maybe it's justified? I don't know really how to feel. Plus I'm still pissed.

Joseph Krol wrote:Sorry to change the topic but apparently Osama Bin Laden has been assassinated. Discuss.

I just wish they'd done it on Friday morning, would have made the whole day's news coverage hilarious.

The guy who tweeted the whole incident live without even knowing what was happening is pretty funny.

Joseph Krol wrote:Sorry to change the topic but apparently Osama Bin Laden has been assassinated. Discuss.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! ...Who is Osama person? Is he a baddie or a good person? Never heard of him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


EDIT: Mum says he's a baddie and he is something to do with dropping bombs or something.....


I really don't see why all the Prime Ministers and everyone is so happy he's dead though (even though it is good that he's dead), because couldn't Osama Bin Laden's friends just carry on with what he was doing (aka dropping bombs etc)?

Soph K wrote:I really don't see why all the Prime Ministers and everyone is so happy he's dead though (even though it is good that he's dead), because couldn't Osama Bin Laden's friends just carry on with what he was doing (aka dropping bombs etc)?

The thing is, Osama's power came from having the biggest beard in the world, and whilst he does have lots of friends with beards, their beards aren't as big as his was, and it will take them a long time to grow them to be as big. So it's good that he's gone because (until one of his friends gets a bigger beard) the baddies' powers have been massively reduced.

Soph K wrote:

Joseph Krol wrote:Sorry to change the topic but apparently Osama Bin Laden has been assassinated. Discuss.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! ...Who is Osama person? Is he a baddie or a good person? Never heard of him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


EDIT: Mum says he's a baddie and he is something to do with dropping bombs or something.....


I really don't see why all the Prime Ministers and everyone is so happy he's dead though (even though it is good that he's dead), because couldn't Osama Bin Laden's friends just carry on with what he was doing (aka dropping bombs etc)?

This is why you can't start new topics.

Charlie Reams wrote:This is why you can't start new topics.

??? why?