Obese People Cost Companies

Strains, sprains, and pains are more common in obese employees than in normal-weight workers, costing U.S. companies billions of dollars, according to researchers here.

The heaviest employees filed twice as many workers' compensation claims and missed 13 times as many workdays as those of normal weight, Truls Østbye, M.D., Ph.D., of Duke and colleagues, reported in the April 23 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.


The obese employees' medical claims costs were seven times higher and indemnity claims costs were 11 times higher, the researchers found.

This is nothing new. However it does bring to light the potential for discrimination. Already many employers require a physical prior to employment. So will it be legal for an employer to look at you and decide you will not work for him because you are to large?
med page

You know, this is almost the same situation that got major media coverage a few months back concerning the employer that decided to give his employees 6 months (something like that) to quit smoking or they'd get sacked. That is, even if they only smoked outside of the workplace. He did the research, crunched the numbers, and came to the conclusion that smokers cost him more to employ - the increased sick days, medical cost claims, increased insurance premiums, etc. seem quite similar to the increased burden (pun intended) obese employees place on a company (the increased costs mentioned in the article.)

I hope no employers get flak for refusing the hire/renew obese employees for the same reason I hope that fellow who refuses to employ smokers continues to run his business the way he sees fit. If an employer decides an employee's job peformance does not outweigh the increased costs of that employee's obesity (real cost and image-wise), the employer should be perfectly within its right not to employ that particular person.

If you don't want to hire the crack-head or heroin addict it's okay, I guess, but people may take offense if you don't want to hire the fat guy. But all three of those types of folks will cost the employer money unnecessarily. Plus, maybe this will be an incentive to get folks off the couch - get fit or lose your job. And if you don't shape up in time, well, unemployed people have plenty of time to work out!

Then again, if I ran a company I believe I should be able to hire and fire at will, no matter how stupid/whimsical/illogical my reasoning. But if you have the hard numbers (cost/benefit) to back you up, it should be a no-brainer.

I've been an employer and always believed it my right to choose whom to hire and whom to fire. After all, I paid the wages. I wasn't running a charity. The government was not offering to reimburse me if/when an employee failed, for whatever reason, to earn his/her keep.

The day politicians and governments pay the wages: fine; they can dictate the terms. Until then, my business - my decisions.

With regard to 'obese' people, yes, there is definitely a preconceived belief that they are 'lazy', both mentally and physically.

As a 'naturally thin' individual myself, with abundant energy, for several years I also believed that 'fat' people are responsible for their shape/condition.

If I, as an employer, could find the time and energy to speed-walk five kilometres each morning and evening, in addition to putting in long hours at work and then returning home to undertake my 'other job' -- then why couldn't overweight employees ALSO get off their backsides.

But then I LEARNED ! I discovered that obesity is *NOT* always about food consumption -- or the quantity or type of food consumed -- or exercise or lack of it.

No. It is not.

How did I learn this?

I learned by having twins.

One twin eats enough for three people. Eats anything he likes. As much as he likes. As often as he likes.

And that little-pig twin is as thin as a fashion model.

The other twin eats less. Works out. Limits food quantity. Avoids junk food.

And that long-suffering twin is overweight and has been ever since puberty.

I've taken both to endicronologists, because the 'thin' twin wanted to be heavier and naturally the overweight twin wanted to be thinner.

And the endicronologist made a joke --- because he really had nothing to say which would help either twin. So he said: ' I know. We should put them both back in the pot and give a real good stir and then pour them into the moulds again. That should make them both even.' Ha ha.

So I took both to a dietician (more than one actually, but the end result was the same in each instance).

After reading the individual twins' lists of what they'd consumed in the previous 7 days, the dietician was more shocked by the 'FAT' twin's LOW calorie intake than by the 'junk/superfluous foods' eaten by the 'thinny'.

" You aren't eating anywhere NEAR enough ! " dietician said to 'fat' twin.
" You need to build the amount of calories you're consuming. YOU SHOULD START HAVING DESSERTS -- NICE CUSTARDS and things like that."

'Duh' said 'fat' twin. ' I'm trying to LOSE weight'.

Dietician didn't earn the exhorbitant sum she charged me and had absolutely NOTHING to say which would help the 'fat' twin.

So 'fat' twin reduced calories drastically. Worked out four hours per day. And lost 27 kilos in approx. 3 months. Was responsible. Went to doctor and explained was on a 'diet' and working out. Was weighed by the doctor each week.

Now listen to this: while the 'fat' twin was on the scales, in underwear, in the doctor's surgery --- the doctor poked the 'fat' twin in the stomach and with a look of distaste/revulsion, said to 'fat' twin: " You need to lose this. You need to do some exercise and reduce calories." !!!!! ('intelligent, well-educated, superior 'naturally thin' doctor had obviously forgotten WHY 'fat' twin was there: i.e., -- for 'medical supervision' whilst on weight-reduction programme. Doctor = insensitive, pig-ignorant idiot.)

After weighing 'fat' twin, doctor flipped through 'fat' twin's meticulous daily notes containing precise calories consumed, type of calorie, and times spent on exercise.

Idiot-doctor looked down the page and saw that 'fat' twin -- through sheer self-torture and self-denial --- had dropped 20-odd kilos in a few months.

Doctor hit the roof and screamed at 'fat' twin that if 'fat' twin did NOT begin eating MORE, effective immediately, then 'fat' twin's liver would collapse !

'Fat' twin went on to drop almost 30 kilos, entirely through own efforts.

BUT --- as SOON as 'fat' twin began eating even half-normally again --- BACK came the kilos.

'Fat' twin has gone through this process at least five times in past 10 years. End result always same.

So -- starve and exerise like crazy and lose weight.
But as soon as normal healthy foods are consumed in 'normal persons' quantities and as soon as the exercise is reduced to say, 1.5 hours per day ...... back comes the 'fat'.

'Fat' twin has many, many friends who can eat junk all day long and never gain a pound. 'Fat' twin sits alongside friends as they do this at the Pizza parlour and McDonalds etc. and 'fat' twin consumes nothing, or perhaps a bottle of water.

'Fat' twin --- thanks to thousands of hours spent exercising -- is FAR more healthy than thin friends or 'thin' twin brother.

But the 'thinnies' feel superior to the 'fat' twin. As in: ' Gross. How can you stand to be so fat. I'd die if I were that weight. Why don't you try to lose some'.

Thin people (and I'm one) are able to buy clothes straight off the rack and yes, we wear (even if inside) a bit of a smug expression when sales-people and others say: ' Gee, I'd love to be like you. You can wear anything and it always looks good. I'd love to lose some weight, but I've never been able to keep it off'.

Yes. Thank goodness I'm honest enough to reply that my weight is no credit to me: it's just the genes I was handed. I admit I eat junk and don't exercise as much or as often as I should now. Sometimes -- to make heavier people feel better -- I say I must have a tapeworm inside me. At least that way they can say: ' Yuk !' and have the rare pleasure of feeling superior for ten seconds -- the way thin people feel when they see 'fatties'.

Recently, all this was confirmed in the tv news re: latest research into 'weight problems'. Can't remember all of it, but it will show on ATS soon, I'm sure. Basically, they said there are 3 types of people: (1) those who didn't receive ANY of the 'genes' for heaviness. These are the archetypal 'thinnies'. (2) those who received ONE 'gene' for weight: these are the 'mediums'. (3) those who received TWO 'genes' for heaviness: these are the 'fatties' who try and try (until they give up, brokenhearted) but can never remain 'thin' for long'.

So, just what we all knew years ago anyway, only now it's 'official'.

My 'fat' twin can work the 'thin' twin into the ground.

The 'fat' twin has brilliant muscle definition and flexibility, thanks to all that exercising over the years.

The 'fat' twin is very intelligent and has two degrees and is employed in a prestigious legal firm.

The 'fat' twin has never taken one 'sick' day from work. Has accrued so MANY 'sick days' that was given the choice: use them or lose them. Chose to lose them.

'Fat' twin is *gorgeous*: lovely skin, eyes, teeth, hair, smile, sense of humour, loyalty, sensitivity regarding others, talented, extremely competent, reknowned for being 'calm in a crisis' and 'an asset' to employers.

Underneath that hated 'fat' lies a suberb body: perfectly proportioned. Even when 'fat', the 'fat' twin remains in proportion: perfect leg to arm to trunk etc. ratio.

Poor 'fat' twin was bestowed TWO of those 'fat gene' things at birth.

Whose 'fault' is that? Anyone's?

So please, for those who enjoy saying or posting that 'fat' people 'should' exercise more and eat less (whether for employment or other reasons), remember what is written above and know that it's as true as can be.

Not EVERYONE who is 'obese' is responsible for their condition.

Sure, by half killing themselves for a limited period of time, it's possible for them to 'get thin'. But when they return to anything resembling 'normal' life, the weight returns.

It's nothing for 'thinnies' to feel superior about.

A lot of 'thinnies' WILL die from blocked arteries, courtesy of all the junk they 'got away with'.

Originally posted by AlphaHumana
You know, this is almost the same situation that got major media coverage a few months back concerning the employer that decided to give his employees 6 months (something like that) to quit smoking or they'd get sacked. That is, even if they only smoked outside of the workplace.

Alpha,
I do not recall hearing about this so thanks for menching it, and thanks for your comment.

Originally posted by Dock6

Not EVERYONE who is 'obese' is responsible for their condition.

Sure, by half killing themselves for a limited period of time, it's possible for them to 'get thin'. But when they return to anything resembling 'normal' life, the weight returns.

You made a very good post Dock, thank you.
You did not hold anything back I don't think. I had not heard your reference to the genes before. I suspect the same combination of genes is in my family. I probably have one of the fat genes. Or I am hoping it is just one any way. My dad sounds like he is just like the skinny twin. But I got to pay attention to my weight just so it does not get out of control. I guess time will tell if it starts spiraling up.

It's nothing for 'thinnies' to feel superior about.

A lot of 'thinnies' WILL die from blocked arteries, courtesy of all the junk they 'got away with'.

That is a very good point to make.
The same thing happened to my father. Although I expect an argument could be made that the blocked arteries may have something to do with genes also.

[edit on 25-4-2007 by RedGolem]

Excellent post Dock6. Very interesting and honest. Goes to show how little we humans know about ourself or our planet, and that medical science and those fine doctors usually do not have a clue.

You have voted Dock6 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.