Like half of America, I’ve fallen for Megan McArdle‘s economic blogging. Here she is carefully working her way through the question of nationalized health care:
The other major reason that I am against national health care is the increasing license it gives elites to wrap their claws around every aspect of everyone’s life. Look at the uptick in stories on obesity in the context of health care reform. Fat people are a problem! They’re killing themselves, and our budget! We must stop them! And what if people won’t do it voluntarily? Because let’s face it, so far, they won’t. Making information, or fresh vegetables, available, hasn’t worked–every intervention you can imagine on the voluntary front, and several involuntary ones, has already been tried either in supermarkets or public schools. Americans are getting fat because they’re eating fattening foods, and not exercising. How far are we willing to go beyond calorie labelling on menus to get people to slim down?
These aren’t just a way to save on health care; they’re a way to extend and expand the cultural hegemony of wealthy white elites. No, seriously. Living a fit, active life is correlated with being healthier. But then, as an economist recently pointed out to me, so is being religious, being married, and living in a small town; how come we don’t have any programs to promote these “healthy lifestyles”?
When you listen to obesity experts, or health wonks, talk, their assertions boil down to the idea that overweight people are either too stupid to understand why they get fat, or have not yet been made sufficiently aware of society’s disgust for their condition. Yet this does not describe any of the overweight people I have ever known, including the construction workers and office clerks at Ground Zero. All were very well aware that the burgers and fries they ate made them fat, and hitting the salad bar instead would probably help them lose weight. They either didn’t care, or felt powerless to control their hunger.
They were also very well aware that society thought they were disgusting, and many of them had internalized this message to the point of open despair. What does another public campaign about overeating have to offer them, other than oozing condescension?
July 29th, 2009 | 3:02 pm
The blog comment is (unintentionally, I hope) condescending toward those struggling with serious weight problems.
July 29th, 2009 | 8:09 pm
To the contrary, as person with long time weight problem, I find it quite honest.
July 29th, 2009 | 11:40 pm
“All were very well aware that the burgers and fries they ate made them fat, and hitting the salad bar instead would probably help them lose weight.”
I don’t think she is being condescending here. I interpreted this to be an example of how condescending the “obesity experts and health wonks” can be about “educating fat people”, making them stop, etc. There are people who, for example, feel perfectly justified in going up to an overweight stranger and saying, “You shouldn’t be eating that cookie. It has a lot of calories!” (I have witnessed and heard of such situations. Surely I am not alone). What does the speaker expect– a gasp of surprise, an outpouring of gratitude, and swift disposal of the cookie (perhaps followed by, “If only I could be thin like you”)? Darn, Grandma– if your cookies came with labels I’d never stray from the righteous path! (And no, I am not implying that all fat people just scarf down cookies and burgers all the time, and I don’t think Megan McArdle is either.) It’s that attitude of, “All they have to do is X and Y, and all we have to do is show them the way!” that’s condescending. “What if we called it ‘Obama’s Salad Bar’… that might do it…”
Somehow among too many people these days, it’s acceptable to scold others– strangers and family and everyone in between– for crimes such as (a) eating or feeding innocent children the “wrong things”, ranging from fruit snacks to food grown with pesticides to any meat in any form, and (b) putting something in the trash that could have gone in the compost bin (I’ve been that person– it wasn’t intentional–and I’m fairly sure my fellow cafe-goer briefly considered hitting me). Yet somehow it’s wholly unacceptable (outrageous, in fact) that anyone would try to scold others or even make judgments about almost anything else. What warrants moral panic, really?
July 30th, 2009 | 12:05 pm
>>It’s that attitude of, “All they have to do is X and Y, and all we have to do is show them the way!” that’s condescending. “What if we called it ‘Obama’s Salad Bar’… that might do it…”>>
Exactly. You know, if you consume 100 calories each day more than you expend (the equivalent of one pat of butter, probably one of those “Grandma’s cookies” or even some of the weight loss bars I see advertised) you’ll gain 10 lbs in a year. Not so much, eh? but in 10 years? That’s 100 lbs…20 years? 200 lbs. Assuming (which you shouldn’t, of course) that your optimum weight is at age 30, by the time you’re 65, you could be carrying an additional 350 lbs – by just eating 100 calories too much each day. (Info derived from “The 200 Calorie Solution” – which I once had, had it borrowed and never returned. And I could sure use it!)
Scary, isn’t it!!
July 30th, 2009 | 6:26 pm
McArdle is great. And yes, Linda misunderstood.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact