British husband told he's too fat to adopt., page 9

This topic is in the Breaking Alternative News discussion forum. (rss)

British husband told he's too fat to adopt. << 6 7 8 9 >>

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 06:50 AM by noonebutme
reply to post by virraszto Virraszto, I don't think it's the fact that the parent is fat so much as being fat is an indication of the person's lack of self-care. A person who is very obese (not just chubby or chunky) and it's medically unhealthy demonstrates a severe lack of nutrition and care about themselves. It's not the child being picked on that is the problem - it's that a very obese parent would not instill proper eating habits and good diet. In fact, the assumption (ok it's an assumption but it's a good one) would be the child picks up the same bad habits and has a very poor lifestyle which isn't helped by the parent. And we have enough fat kids in the world who sit around and play games and watch tv, eating processed crap food and sweets rather than a proper diet with exercise. A severly overweight parent has shown they cannot manage themselves -- so how would they show to a child anything different?
copyright & usage

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 08:20 AM by dean007
not surprising the guy with the tin foil hat is gay thanks for correcting my spelling mistakes thats important are you a mainstream gay English teacher from a big city so you think the kids of a fat person would get more hassle in school than the children of two gay parents i think your over estimating how adult children are
copyright & usage

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 12:27 PM by noonebutme
Originally posted by dean007 not surprising the guy with the tin foil hat is gay thanks for correcting my spelling mistakes thats important are you a mainstream gay English teacher from a big city so you think the kids of a fat person would get more hassle in school than the children of two gay parents i think your over estimating how adult children are Sigh, again, your missing the entire point here. That's NOT the issue -- the issue is whether or not the adult is qualified to look after a child. And due to his obesity or lack of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, was was deemed unfit. That's the issue -- the justifications as to why he was not allowed to adopt a child. Not whether the kid would get picked on..! I can see it now. Child services reviewing his application, looking at him and saying, "No, he's too fat -- imagine how much the child will get picked on in school" For the record I'm neither gay nor a school teacher. I wouldn't mind being bisexual tho - doubles the playing field!
copyright & usage

reply posted on 16-1-2009 @ 11:14 PM by WyrdeOne
reply to post by Avenginggecko Do you really think doctors made obesity a disease to make money? No, I think pharmaceutical companies came out with pills for it, and then fat people jumped on the bandwagon, dragging their doctors kicking and screaming. Remember, there aren't any pharmaceuticals to treat obesity. Yes there are. There are drugs marketed to reduce appetite, and there are drugs marketed to absorb the fat in the food you eat so your body never gets a chance. CBS Americans spend about $35 billion a year on weight-loss products. I don't know about you, but my friends in the medical community (I also happen to work in it) are not so evil as to simply label someone obese to get cash out of them. So, you work in the medical community but you're unaware of the fact that there are close to a dozen prescription diet drugs, and hundreds more OTC weight loss pills? Obesity is proven to cause serious heart problems and diabetes. No, it hasn't been proven to cause serious heart problems. Obese people no more likely to die from heart disease than non-obese. However, obese people who do not have diabetes had the same risk of dying or being critically ill as non-obese people without diabetes. So, again, you're in the medical community and you don't know this, why? You know what's been proven to be more dangerous that obesity? Bad advice from medical 'professionals'... Diabetes does not result from obesity, it's the other way around Part of the reason for the association of diabetes with obesity is that people with diabetes often are very fat. But what gets missed is that their obesity often develops as a result of the very high blood sugars, rather than the other way around. We know now that blood sugars of 180 mg/dl or higher cause insulin resistance and there appears to be a strong relationship between insulin resistance and the tendency to pack on weight. So when people's post-meal blood sugar control starts to deteriorate one of the first things that happens is that they pack on extra pounds. A lot of diabetic people are fat - so what? A lot of diabetic people drink water and sleep facing due north - these are not causative relationships, these are coincidences... Hell, I know that much about scientific method, and I barely attended my high school labs... I've known people who have died directly due to their obesity. Just because you think it doesn't make it true. Obesity is the second leading cause of preventable deaths in the US after tobacco use. What a load of CRAP! Where are your facts? When has there ever been a proper study that definitively showed a link between obesity and abnormal life span? Do you even know who authored the study showing 300,000 deaths a year are attributable to obesity? I do, and that's bad news for you. www.news-medical.net... Obesity causes 300,000 deaths each year This statistic comes from a study by David Allison, who has received funding from at least 20 companies involved in weight loss products. Among many other flaws, Allison's study used data from as long ago as 1948 and failed to account for any of the improvements in medical treatments over the last 50 years. So yes, I do believe it is a disease. It is by and large self afflicted, just like anorexia, but it is a disease nonetheless. There are people out there who believe the earth is 4000 years old. Believing in something doesn't necessarily make it so. Tattoos and piercings are a non issue with the government because they aren't proven harmful to children...that's kind of a straw man argument to make smokers and alcoholics seem more benign, no? The comparison was meant to illustrate the effect STIGMA has on adoption practices, not make smoking seem more benign. Don't you think the state would take into consideration the fact that he was a single male and if he adopted would have to juggle work, family, and a social life by himself? Okay, that's twice now. What are the odds? Where do y'all live, and when can I move to this magical place wherein infidelity has ceased to exist? Finally - many, many people have said on this thread that the guy is an ass for not losing weight to qualify. Why should he have to bow and scrape in order to do a good deed and a public service? What's wrong with that picture? Y'all say "It's not a big deal, he's only gotta lose a couple pounds." Do you check your principles at the door, or what? For me, it's not the number of pounds, or the details of the requirements, it's the fact that this man's weight is even an issue. His weight, his sexual preference, his hair color, the frequency with which he self-abuses - these are not relevant, and they're none of your business or anybody else's. His weight will not limit his ability to provide a loving, stable home, and that's the end of the argument as far as I'm concerned. [edit on 17-1-2009 by WyrdeOne]
copyright & usage
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
reply posted on 17-1-2009 @ 10:21 AM by secretagent woooman
Most agencies will not permit adoptions to parents with life-threatening or lifestyle-related diseases meaning if you have been treated for cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure or certain other conditions, forget it. The whole point is to keep kids from going back into the system if the parent dies prematurely. Also, kids are a lot of work and they don't want someone who isn't able or responsible enough to look aftert them. My uncle and his wife went through this screening a few years back to adopt from Russia and it is very comprehensive, she was told point blank that she was too fat to adopt so she lost weight.
copyright & usage

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 12:10 PM by Avenginggecko
reply to post by WyrdeOne Sigh. "There is no magic pill for obesity," says David Orloff, M.D., director of the FDA's Division of Metabolic and Endocrine Drug Products. "The best effect you're going to get is with a concerted long-term regimen of diet and exercise. If you choose to take a drug along with this effort, it may provide additional help." There is no drug to treat obesity. Prescription weight loss drugs and OTC pills like Alli do not treat obesity. Sorry, I know you're trying your best to sound educated on the subject, but you aren't. Google can be your friend and your enemy. So, you work in the medical community but you're unaware of the fact that there are close to a dozen prescription diet drugs, and hundreds more OTC weight loss pills? Nice job completely re-interpreting my post to fit your argument. However, I'd like to point out to you that I never once said "I do not believe there are prescription diet drugs or OTC weight loss pills." I'll restate it for you: prescription diet pills and OTC weight loss pills do not treat obesity: weight loss products do not equal obesity treatments. No, it hasn't been proven to cause serious heart problems. Obese people no more likely to die from heart disease than non-obese. Sponsored Links End-stage heart failure Left ventricular assist device may increase survival in some patients. www.hearthope.com Blood Pressure Above 160? Explore Investigational Blood Pressure Device in Clinical Trial www.BloodPressureTrial.com Lasting Obesity Solution Lap-Band is your proven solution Dallas Offices: 877-207-9471 www.TrueResults.com Medical Ads Signs of Heart Problems Heart Chest Pain Abnormal Heart Rhythms Cholesterol Heart Failure Treatment Dateline: August 5, 2002 Doctors have suspected for a long time that overweight patients appear to have an increased risk of developing heart failure, but most believed that the heart failure resulted from the diabetes, high blood pressure and coronary artery disease associated with obesity. Now, however, a new study - published in the August 1 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine - shows that obesity itself (and not just the associated medical conditions) can lead to heart failure. Furthermore, the study shows that even excess body weight - in people who are not considered obese - substantially increases the risk of heart failure. Source American Heart Association University Study There are countless studies that correlate obesity and heart failure. Thanks for your quick attempt to Google an answer to your problem, but the science linking obesity and heart failure is still solid. So, again, you're in the medical community and you don't know this, why? You know what's been proven to be more dangerous that obesity? Bad advice from medical 'professionals'... 1. I'll be more than happy to provide you with my info over U2U. I can back up my statements, so respectfully place your passive aggressive tactics and "rolling eye" smileys where they belong 2. You quoted a blog??? That's hilarious. You see, if you actually knew about Type 1 and 2 diabetes, you'd know that diabetes can be caused by several factors. Obesity is one of them. Sheesh. Nice job quoting a blog that had no scientific backing. I applaud. If you'll read the blog carefully, you'll note that the author never states specifically that the high blood sugar level always causes diabetes first and obesity second. They are careful not to make that distinction, because they know it's not true. Just because you think it doesn't make it true. I never thought it: it is fact that their obesity caused their death, or had an overwhelming contribution to it. What a load of CRAP! Where are your facts? When has there ever been a proper study that definitively showed a link between obesity and abnormal life span? Do you even know who authored the study showing 300,000 deaths a year are attributable to obesity? I do, and that's bad news for you. Wow, okay. Put words in my mouth much? Did I ever quote that study? A study by respected researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Cancer Institute found that being obese accounted for 112,000 deaths in 2000, far fewer than the estimate of 400,000 deaths in a separate CDC study published last year. Poor diet and lack of exercise still rank as the nation's No. 2 preventable killer based on the new estimate, but well behind smoking (435, 000 deaths a year) and closer to alcohol consumption (85,000 deaths). Durr...mmkay. I don't have time to reply to the rest of your post. I'm off to the gym. If you'd like to know how I'm a part of the medical community, you're more than welcome to U2U me. [edit on 18-1-2009 by Avenginggecko]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 07:34 PM by WyrdeOne
gecko There is no drug to treat obesity. Prescription weight loss drugs and OTC pills like Alli do not treat obesity. What's your logic here? There are drugs that make you less fat, but they somehow don't treat obesity? You're really reaching if semantics are your refuge in this argument. I'll restate it for you: prescription diet pills and OTC weight loss pills do not treat obesity: weight loss products do not equal obesity treatments. How do you figure? What is obesity if not being overweight? If a drug treats the weight of a patient, how is it not treating obesity? Seriously, what is your logic? Furthermore, the study shows that even excess body weight - in people who are not considered obese - substantially increases the risk of heart failure. That study was seven years old. Here's another, slightly more RECENT one that backs me up (from late '08). archinte.ama-assn.org... the science linking obesity and heart failure is still solid. The science was solid in 2002, isn't that what you mean? As someone in the medical community, you should know that research is always being done and old conclusions are always being re-examined. Nice job quoting a blog that had no scientific backing. I applaud. If you'll read the blog carefully, you'll note that the author never states specifically that the high blood sugar level always causes diabetes first and obesity second. They are careful not to make that distinction, because they know it's not true. Why not take issue with the information and not the source - is it because you can't contest the simple logic that people with diabetes are often going to be overweight thanks to the abundance of sugar in their blood and their inability to metabolize it without creating fat deposits? Yeah, I think that's it... Whether the high blood sugar causes the obesity or the diabetes first doesn't matter, what matters is that instances of early death in otherwise healthy overweight people are right on par with the rest of society. That means the obesity doesn't cause early death - other conditions do, conditions, like diabetes, that can also cause a person to gain a lot of weight. Try this instead, if you don't like my link. www.webmd.com... And this... www.foxnews.com... Cardiologist Richard A. Stein, MD, says the new study may give physicians a more nuanced understanding of the role of obesity and obesity-related conditions like diabetes in early death. Stein is director of cardiology at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York City. He is also a spokesman for the American Heart Association. “It has become a mantra in the U.S. that being overweight will kill you,” he tells WebMD. “This study suggests that it is not obesity per se, but the company it keeps that is to blame.” I never thought it: it is fact that their obesity caused their death, or had an overwhelming contribution to it. There is a distinct difference between FACT and DELUSION. You do a serious disservice to the memory of your friends with such blind allegiance to junk science. I will eat my hat if you can show beyond a doubt that your friends died because they were overweight, and not because of some underlying or aggravating condition. There are millions of perfectly healthy fat people in the world, and there are an equal number of seriously unhealthy skinny people. Being fat can be a SIGN of an underlying condition, it can be a symptom of a condition, and it can be indicative of a lifestyle that could cause any number of different diseases, from cancer to diabetes, but it DOES NOT CAUSE illness. The CDC isn't worth spit, and their conclusions are based on the same asinine logic that could link water and cancer, or air and cancer - just because a person is fat and dies of cancer, or heart disease, or stroke, it doesn't mean the weight cause the condition. This is elementary school science here... The CDC doesn't do science - they do statistics. They say "1,000,000 smokers died in such a such year, which means there are 1,000,000 deaths attributed to cigarettes in that year" They do the exact same thing when it comes to obesity, and it pisses me off. This is flat-out wrong, and would earn you a D in any elementary science class. In order to prove a causative relationship, you have to have some measure of control. There is no control in these statistics-based evaluations, there's no accounting for the multitude of variables in play. It's not science, don't kid yourself.
copyright & usage