According to yesterday's papers, a young boy who was taken from his parents and put into care because of his extreme obesity, has lost 20kg!
The child was the only confirmed case of a young Australias being removed from his family because of excessive weight problems.
He is now living with carers in Sydney's western suburbs, and is doing well.
He was nine years of age in 2007 when he was removed from his family by the Department of Children's Services.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
CURE FOR OBESITY
Don Tolman noted author, public speaker, trainer, educator, entertainer and experimental nutritional-eating researcher has the definitive answer on what's crippling the Western World today.
Just like the Obesity Police, Don says "obesity is NOT a disease."
"Eat in moderation. Eat whole foods (not processed foods), get out and about and get plenty of fresh air, sunshine, walk every day, drinks lots of water, have healthy relationships and have a passion for what you do."
Naturally, the medical world sells it quite differently.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Despite obesity eating up the largest part of global health budgets, the "health-care" industry's profits reach trillions of dollars annually while they "attempt to find a cure".
To learn more on Don Tolman's healthy approach to living go to
www.dontolmaninternational.com
Just like the Obesity Police, Don says "obesity is NOT a disease."
"Eat in moderation. Eat whole foods (not processed foods), get out and about and get plenty of fresh air, sunshine, walk every day, drinks lots of water, have healthy relationships and have a passion for what you do."
Naturally, the medical world sells it quite differently.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Despite obesity eating up the largest part of global health budgets, the "health-care" industry's profits reach trillions of dollars annually while they "attempt to find a cure".
To learn more on Don Tolman's healthy approach to living go to
www.dontolmaninternational.com
Sunday, February 8, 2009
EASY
The increasing number of studies into obesity has us wondering whether it's the new recession-proof growth industry: no one is prepared to say that the solution is simple, and we can not understand why. To our mind using our God given intelligence is the answer that the geniuses are looking for. Eating junk-food will make you fat. Eating natural food will not do that.
Friday, February 6, 2009
OUTRAGE
Splashed across the front page of Sydney's Daily Telegraph today comes the appalling news that babies as young as one are being diagnosed as obese, with a major hospital treating youngsters twice the size they should be.
The children are developing adult conditions including liver and heart disease, diabetes and sleep apnoea.
This atrocity is being thrust upon our children by those in the community who couldn't give a shit!
The Obesity Police cops a lot of flack over the stance it takes on obesity, its causes and effects, but the passion with which we highlight the dangers of this scourge now highlights the most abhorrent situation to arise to date.
If we reported that children in Australia as young as one were purposely being starved to death there would be outrage.
So why not the outrage when children as young as one are being fed so much crap that they are ending up twice the size that they should be.
And don't go using the argument that these children have "inherited" an obese gene or that their keepers simply have "no idea". That just won't cut it.
All creatures great and small know instinctivey how to care for their young, and care they do: for if they didn't there would be no World for us in which to live.
Due to their keepers malevolent attitude to life, these children have inherited a lifetime of misery, of catastrophic psycho-socio-physical problems, that will plague them for the rest of their life.
We say hang those responsible for creating this preventible, shameful historic mess.
The children are developing adult conditions including liver and heart disease, diabetes and sleep apnoea.
This atrocity is being thrust upon our children by those in the community who couldn't give a shit!
The Obesity Police cops a lot of flack over the stance it takes on obesity, its causes and effects, but the passion with which we highlight the dangers of this scourge now highlights the most abhorrent situation to arise to date.
If we reported that children in Australia as young as one were purposely being starved to death there would be outrage.
So why not the outrage when children as young as one are being fed so much crap that they are ending up twice the size that they should be.
And don't go using the argument that these children have "inherited" an obese gene or that their keepers simply have "no idea". That just won't cut it.
All creatures great and small know instinctivey how to care for their young, and care they do: for if they didn't there would be no World for us in which to live.
Due to their keepers malevolent attitude to life, these children have inherited a lifetime of misery, of catastrophic psycho-socio-physical problems, that will plague them for the rest of their life.
We say hang those responsible for creating this preventible, shameful historic mess.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
FAT CATS
Why are we not surprised at the results of a recent Choice investigation into popuar diet plans such as Betty Baxter, MediTrim and Tony Ferguson.
Choice found that most did not provide the minimum required micronutrients and all except Betty Baxter were very low in fibre.
It seems the pharmacies were doing very nicely out of the sales, but not so the customers. Once again more dollars for more quickfixes.
What is so hard about eating fresh, wholesome, nutritious food?
Choice found that most did not provide the minimum required micronutrients and all except Betty Baxter were very low in fibre.
It seems the pharmacies were doing very nicely out of the sales, but not so the customers. Once again more dollars for more quickfixes.
What is so hard about eating fresh, wholesome, nutritious food?
FAT TAX
It has been suggested that an extra tax be added to junk food. The thinking that it would encourage people to buy healthy products. This may sound good in principle but it would not work in practice.
Experience has shown, the higher the cost for junk food the less will be spent on healthy food. You can see this every day of your life. Follow lovers of junk food around a supermarket as they pick and chose what to eat.
How may trolleys filled with fresh wholesome food do you see? Not many. How many trolleys do you see laden with junk? Nearly all.
Our suggestion?
Have a fat tax, taxing fat individuals. The fatter they are the more tax they pay. Just as we supposedly do with income tax. The more we make the more we pay.
Call it the "Obesity Tax". The more we weigh the more tax we pay.
Far fetched? Some may think so. Realistic? We think so!
Economic indicators show that an increasing burden is being placed on the economy by overweight and unhealthy people.
Hit them where it hurts and we may start to put an end to this seemingly untenable war.
Experience has shown, the higher the cost for junk food the less will be spent on healthy food. You can see this every day of your life. Follow lovers of junk food around a supermarket as they pick and chose what to eat.
How may trolleys filled with fresh wholesome food do you see? Not many. How many trolleys do you see laden with junk? Nearly all.
Our suggestion?
Have a fat tax, taxing fat individuals. The fatter they are the more tax they pay. Just as we supposedly do with income tax. The more we make the more we pay.
Call it the "Obesity Tax". The more we weigh the more tax we pay.
Far fetched? Some may think so. Realistic? We think so!
Economic indicators show that an increasing burden is being placed on the economy by overweight and unhealthy people.
Hit them where it hurts and we may start to put an end to this seemingly untenable war.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
HEAVEN HELP US
"Experts" are calling for more lap-band surgery to be performed to help fight the obesity epidemic. Of course they would. It puts more money in their pocket.
Lap-band surgery costs approximately $AUD 15,000. That's right, fifteen THOUSAND dollars.
For your money you get a silicone belt implanted FOR LIFE around the top of your stomach. Supposedly you get "full" more quickly and supposedly lose weight.
Sure there are success stories. Every product on the market place has success stories. You seldom read about the disasters.
What lap-band doesn't address is the fact that how a man thinks, he is. So therefore, the thinking on food isn't changed by "the band", the gut is merely tied up: like a hostage.
Nutrition isn't addressed either, 'cause you can eat whatever you want. Lap-band doesn't help you eat any more heathily. You can eat whatever you want. You may shovel in whatever crap you like. With "the band" you just can't shovel in as much crap.
Sensible? Practical? Desirable? We think not.
It's the blight of our society, the notion that there should be a quickfix for everything. Because for every quickfix there's an "expert" out there making a quickbuck. In this instance it's the medicos making $AUD 15,000 for every quickfix.
A report released this week by Access Economics Australia’s premier economic consulting firm, estimates the total cost of obesity for 2008 - just in Australia - at a staggering $AUD 58.2 billion. That's 58.2 million million dollars.
Comparable figures for the USA will reach gargantuan proportions at $AUD 842 billion: eight hundred and forty-two million, million dollars.
Heaven help us!
Lap-band surgery costs approximately $AUD 15,000. That's right, fifteen THOUSAND dollars.
For your money you get a silicone belt implanted FOR LIFE around the top of your stomach. Supposedly you get "full" more quickly and supposedly lose weight.
Sure there are success stories. Every product on the market place has success stories. You seldom read about the disasters.
What lap-band doesn't address is the fact that how a man thinks, he is. So therefore, the thinking on food isn't changed by "the band", the gut is merely tied up: like a hostage.
Nutrition isn't addressed either, 'cause you can eat whatever you want. Lap-band doesn't help you eat any more heathily. You can eat whatever you want. You may shovel in whatever crap you like. With "the band" you just can't shovel in as much crap.
Sensible? Practical? Desirable? We think not.
It's the blight of our society, the notion that there should be a quickfix for everything. Because for every quickfix there's an "expert" out there making a quickbuck. In this instance it's the medicos making $AUD 15,000 for every quickfix.
A report released this week by Access Economics Australia’s premier economic consulting firm, estimates the total cost of obesity for 2008 - just in Australia - at a staggering $AUD 58.2 billion. That's 58.2 million million dollars.
Comparable figures for the USA will reach gargantuan proportions at $AUD 842 billion: eight hundred and forty-two million, million dollars.
Heaven help us!
FAT CHANCE
A Cairns (Queensland) woman claims she was discriminated against by Jetstar for being overweight.According to several newspapers, the woman, an IT worker who weighs 160kg, claims she was forced to pay for a second seat for herself 'for other peoples comfort' when she flew from Cairns to Coolangatta yesterday.
On the basis that discrimination means behavior that treats people unequally, the woman's notion that she has been discriminated against is completely misguided.
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, the average weight for an adult female in the US is 162.9 pounds (or 76.95kg).
The 160kg woman is more than twice the size and weight of the average adult female and could not under any circumstances be expected to be treated equally.
She herself expects preferential treatment because of her size. If she did not expect preferential treatment she would be satisfied to purchase one seat and attempt to squeeze her over-sized body into it for the joy-ride.
In this instance the Northern Belle's choice to allow herself to become so grossly overweight (that she becomes equal in size to a Northern Fur Seal which weighs 160kg) is just one of the many costs of being out of whack with nature.
We'll have more on that later!
EDITORS NOTE: In the event that such a person became ill, it would take a champion power lifter to move her to safety.
Monday, February 2, 2009
OBESITY CAN BE "CAUGHT" FROM ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL
So they say, but we don't believe it.
Reports in today's media suggest that obesity has been linked to a "highly infectious virus" that "causes sniffles". Serious!
We've pulled the article from the local rag and pinned it up on the wall and are going to throw cream buns at it to see what effect that has on the paper-stock that the publisher has used. I think it's about time that "they" who study wee humans start getting their brains brushed, don't you?
Who in their right mind would for one nano-second seriously consider that if you sit next to some fat guy (or girl) you will "catch the disease"? Only glue-sniffing, air-brushed scientists would believe it, of course!
We all know that since time began "what goes in your mouth lands on your hips and spreads to every other part of your body" if you keep shovelling the food in.
Trust me, if an obese person sneezes next to you on the train, or bus, or plane - or wherever else you may be - the only thing you need worry about is being sprayed with food . . . NOT being sprayed with the "obesity virus".
Next thing you know they'll start saying that by crop dusting the population with some new-fangled-chocolate-flavoured-fat-destroying-whizzamy-jizz is the solution to the abhoernt obesity crisis, and we all know that that is not going to happen.
Or do we?
Reports in today's media suggest that obesity has been linked to a "highly infectious virus" that "causes sniffles". Serious!
We've pulled the article from the local rag and pinned it up on the wall and are going to throw cream buns at it to see what effect that has on the paper-stock that the publisher has used. I think it's about time that "they" who study wee humans start getting their brains brushed, don't you?
Who in their right mind would for one nano-second seriously consider that if you sit next to some fat guy (or girl) you will "catch the disease"? Only glue-sniffing, air-brushed scientists would believe it, of course!
We all know that since time began "what goes in your mouth lands on your hips and spreads to every other part of your body" if you keep shovelling the food in.
Trust me, if an obese person sneezes next to you on the train, or bus, or plane - or wherever else you may be - the only thing you need worry about is being sprayed with food . . . NOT being sprayed with the "obesity virus".
Next thing you know they'll start saying that by crop dusting the population with some new-fangled-chocolate-flavoured-fat-destroying-whizzamy-jizz is the solution to the abhoernt obesity crisis, and we all know that that is not going to happen.
Or do we?
WE ARE NOT ALONE
The line we take on abuse / obesity / parenting is hard one, shared by some but not shared by others.
Today in the Daily Telegraph (Sydney NSW) William Hick wrote "Let's not muck around here - parents who allow their children to become obese are not just guilty of child neglect but also of child abuse".
"Fat kids - through no fault of their own - are destined to have a life of serious medical conditions and ill health. parents who inflict these conditions upon their children should be dealt with just as harshly as the law would deal with child abusers".
On the Gold Coast (Queensland) a random sampling of opinions on whether obese children should be taken away from their parents brought a mixed, if not confused, response.
Some suggested the kids should go out and play more. What does game-playing achieve? Others suggested that parents needed to realise that they're making their kids unhealthy by (bad) feeding habits. What would mere realisation achieve? One suggested that schools need money so kids can do tennis and swimming. What would playing tennis and swimming in a pool achieve for an obese child?
The most sensible response came from a teenager - not an Obesity Police Enforcement Officer - who said "you have to think of the mental state of kids", which is our point exactly.
We all frame our life from how we are raised. If we are raised on junk food (and by junk food we mean that which is not wholesome and nutritious) then we are cursed for life with the thought that the junk "food" we eat is all that is required (from the thinking "if it is good enough for Mum and Dad, then it is good enough for me.")
The concept of what goes in our mouth is what fires (or misfires) our life is not so difficult to understand. Is it?
Today in the Daily Telegraph (Sydney NSW) William Hick wrote "Let's not muck around here - parents who allow their children to become obese are not just guilty of child neglect but also of child abuse".
"Fat kids - through no fault of their own - are destined to have a life of serious medical conditions and ill health. parents who inflict these conditions upon their children should be dealt with just as harshly as the law would deal with child abusers".
On the Gold Coast (Queensland) a random sampling of opinions on whether obese children should be taken away from their parents brought a mixed, if not confused, response.
Some suggested the kids should go out and play more. What does game-playing achieve? Others suggested that parents needed to realise that they're making their kids unhealthy by (bad) feeding habits. What would mere realisation achieve? One suggested that schools need money so kids can do tennis and swimming. What would playing tennis and swimming in a pool achieve for an obese child?
The most sensible response came from a teenager - not an Obesity Police Enforcement Officer - who said "you have to think of the mental state of kids", which is our point exactly.
We all frame our life from how we are raised. If we are raised on junk food (and by junk food we mean that which is not wholesome and nutritious) then we are cursed for life with the thought that the junk "food" we eat is all that is required (from the thinking "if it is good enough for Mum and Dad, then it is good enough for me.")
The concept of what goes in our mouth is what fires (or misfires) our life is not so difficult to understand. Is it?
BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE
Subsequent to a declaration being made that food is that which is natural and wholesome and nutritious then purveyors of junk food shall be liable to imprisonment, as they would then be a party to an offence.
According to the Criminal Code when an offence is committed, each of the following persons is deemed to have taken part in committing the offence and to be guilty of the offence, and may be charged with actually committing it, that is to say (a) every person who actually does the act or makes the omission which constitutes the offence; (b) every person who does or omits to do any act for the purpose of enabling or aiding another person to commit the offence; (c) every person who aids another person in committing the offence; (d) any person who counsels or procures any other person to commit the offence.
According to the Criminal Code when an offence is committed, each of the following persons is deemed to have taken part in committing the offence and to be guilty of the offence, and may be charged with actually committing it, that is to say (a) every person who actually does the act or makes the omission which constitutes the offence; (b) every person who does or omits to do any act for the purpose of enabling or aiding another person to commit the offence; (c) every person who aids another person in committing the offence; (d) any person who counsels or procures any other person to commit the offence.
A conviction would carry the same consequences in all respects as a conviction of committing the offence and that, once again, could be seven (7) years imprisonment.
We guarantee that no court would have the guts to provide a legal definition of what, according to nature, constitutes food. Too much money is at stake even though in the long term we shall kill off the human race if we continue to eat unhealthy shit.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
JAIL THEM
According to the Daily Telegraph, a Dr Shirley Alexander from the Children's Hospital at Westmead (Sydney, NSW, Australia) wants parents to be disciplined in cases where their child becomes too overweight, and children to be taken away from their parents if they become too fat! Under her proposal, child protection agencies would be called in to seize a child " when parents have repeatedly failed to address diet problems".
At first glance Dr Alexander's proposal may seem extreme but when you look into problems of malnutrition (which surely must include obesity) the proposal doesn't go far enough.
Under the Criminal Code a person who, having the lawful care or charge of a child under 16 years, causes harm to the child by any prescribed conduct that the person knew or ought reasonably to have known would be likely to cause harm to the child commits a crime. That crime is punishable by imprisonment for seven (7) years.
Harm in that sense means any detrimental effect of a significant nature on the child’s physical, psychological or emotional well-being, whether temporary or permanent, and prescribed conduct means failing to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, medical treatment, accommodation or care when it is available to the person from his or her own resources; or failing to take all lawful steps to obtain adequate food, clothing, medical treatment, accommodation or care when it is not available to the person from his or her own resources.
Perhaps the champions of health should set about a test case in which a declaration is sought on the definition of "food" for, to our knowledge, it does not exist in legislation. Isn't that ludicrous, if not down-right abhorrent. We believe that food should be defined as that which is wholesome and nutritious.
The community has a moral and legal obligation to care for children but we are certainly not doing it. And we are certainly falling short of the mark by suggesting that children should be taken away from their parents only when the children, in extreme cases, become obese.
At first glance Dr Alexander's proposal may seem extreme but when you look into problems of malnutrition (which surely must include obesity) the proposal doesn't go far enough.
Under the Criminal Code a person who, having the lawful care or charge of a child under 16 years, causes harm to the child by any prescribed conduct that the person knew or ought reasonably to have known would be likely to cause harm to the child commits a crime. That crime is punishable by imprisonment for seven (7) years.
Harm in that sense means any detrimental effect of a significant nature on the child’s physical, psychological or emotional well-being, whether temporary or permanent, and prescribed conduct means failing to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, medical treatment, accommodation or care when it is available to the person from his or her own resources; or failing to take all lawful steps to obtain adequate food, clothing, medical treatment, accommodation or care when it is not available to the person from his or her own resources.
Perhaps the champions of health should set about a test case in which a declaration is sought on the definition of "food" for, to our knowledge, it does not exist in legislation. Isn't that ludicrous, if not down-right abhorrent. We believe that food should be defined as that which is wholesome and nutritious.
The community has a moral and legal obligation to care for children but we are certainly not doing it. And we are certainly falling short of the mark by suggesting that children should be taken away from their parents only when the children, in extreme cases, become obese.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
