No Surprise, ADA Supports Big Government Scheme
It seems that the American Diabetes Association (ADA) has bought into the Obamacare debacle and is joining in with the propaganda parade. As a member (soon to be former member) of the ADA I received a mailing this week linking me to a website with an article entitled "Separating Myth from Fact: The Truth about Diabetes and Health Care Reform." The article went on to claim that health care reform will not cause rationing, increased costs or interfere in the doctor patient relationship. Really? While it is true that health care reform does not need to include these elements, the plan currently on the table clearly does. Like big labor unions, big medical organizations such as the ADA, and AMA are in the pocket of the statist elites. They clearly do not represent the wishes or interests of their constituents and the sooner they know that we have had enough by way of dwindling memberships the better off we will be as a medical profession and nation.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Tucson Patriots on Parade
Protesting absentee Congresswoman Giffords' support for outrageous government health care takeover yesterday afternoon. Great crowd with immense support from drivers. The grassroots enthusiasm was evident when contrasting the creative home made signs by Tea Party Patriots vs the manufactured signs displayed by the much small number of medical tyranny supporters displayed earlier in the day.
Protesting absentee Congresswoman Giffords' support for outrageous government health care takeover yesterday afternoon. Great crowd with immense support from drivers. The grassroots enthusiasm was evident when contrasting the creative home made signs by Tea Party Patriots vs the manufactured signs displayed by the much small number of medical tyranny supporters displayed earlier in the day.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
Un-Timely Report
A recent Time magazine article challenged the well accepted premise that exercise is helpful for weight loss and weight control. Indeed, the article even suggested that efforts to increase public physical activity levels over the past couple decades have actually contributed to the obesity epidemic. The article was based on anecdotal evidence and a single small scientific study. The article asserts that exercise can produce uncontrollable hunger and/or decrease in will power that causes people to eat in excess of what is burned off with the exercise performed. Rush Limbaugh who is right 99.7% of the time also embraced this report on his radio program indicating it was consistent with his own experiences. Well Rush this is one that you got wrong.
In reality, the vast majority of studies have shown that physical activity is an important component of successful weight loss programs, and is virtually indispensable for maintaining weight. This does not even include the myriad of studies revealing the other health benefits of regular exercise whether or not it leads to weight loss. Finally, when it comes to anecdotal evidence it would seem that these observations favor exercise as a valuable weight maintenance tool as well. Think about the people walking, running and biking around your neighborhood. If the Time magazine assertions are correct these should be the most obese people in the community. Clearly, that is not the case.
A recent Time magazine article challenged the well accepted premise that exercise is helpful for weight loss and weight control. Indeed, the article even suggested that efforts to increase public physical activity levels over the past couple decades have actually contributed to the obesity epidemic. The article was based on anecdotal evidence and a single small scientific study. The article asserts that exercise can produce uncontrollable hunger and/or decrease in will power that causes people to eat in excess of what is burned off with the exercise performed. Rush Limbaugh who is right 99.7% of the time also embraced this report on his radio program indicating it was consistent with his own experiences. Well Rush this is one that you got wrong.
In reality, the vast majority of studies have shown that physical activity is an important component of successful weight loss programs, and is virtually indispensable for maintaining weight. This does not even include the myriad of studies revealing the other health benefits of regular exercise whether or not it leads to weight loss. Finally, when it comes to anecdotal evidence it would seem that these observations favor exercise as a valuable weight maintenance tool as well. Think about the people walking, running and biking around your neighborhood. If the Time magazine assertions are correct these should be the most obese people in the community. Clearly, that is not the case.
Sunday, August 09, 2009
I Am the Mob!
Sorry I missed the last event as I was out of town. Looking to partake in the mob activity on August 21st. Hope to get on Obama's list.
WHAT: Nationwide Recess Rally Against Socialized Medicine
WHO: Tucson Tea Party and allied organizations
WHERE: Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ Office (D-AZ), 1661 N. Swan, Suite 112. Tucson, AZ 85712
WHEN: August 21 from 4 - 7 p.m.
Sorry I missed the last event as I was out of town. Looking to partake in the mob activity on August 21st. Hope to get on Obama's list.
WHAT: Nationwide Recess Rally Against Socialized Medicine
WHO: Tucson Tea Party and allied organizations
WHERE: Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ Office (D-AZ), 1661 N. Swan, Suite 112. Tucson, AZ 85712
WHEN: August 21 from 4 - 7 p.m.
Designed to Run
I just finished Born to Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World has Never Seen on my recent West Coast road trip. I listened to the audio download version and stayed riveted to the story whenever I could get a spare moment with my iPod. The author Christopher McDougall begins with the question most runners ask themselves at some point. If running is so good for me why does something always hurt? Not just muscle stiffness from tough work outs, but genuine overuse injuries from the low back down to the heels. While exploration of associations between over-engineered running shoes and the explosion of running injuries the past 4 decades was provocative, McDougall primarily derives the answer to his question from his interactions with the Tarahumara Indians and a group of oddball American ultra-marathoners.
The Tarahumara are a mysterious people from the rugged and largely inaccessible Copper Canyons of Mexico whose ancient culture revolves around a love of running, and not just foot races through the village, but extraordinary runs of unfathomable distances for young and old alike. Yet, as intriguing as the Tarahmara and the eccentric American ultra-runners (shoed and barefoot) were in this book the sections I enjoyed most involved the discussions of evidence accumulated by a small group of scientists indicating that humans were designed to run long distances. This unique ability within the animal kingdom may explain how our species survived and thrived before developing tools despite being slow and relatively underdeveloped in terms of musculature. This has been, and may still be, the minority opinion when it comes to the origins of human locomotion, with walking being the favored explanation for our upright posture. Nevertheless, the evidence for long distance running as the means by which humans out competed their pre-historical counterparts is persuasive and is based on evidence obtained from multiple fields including comparative anatomy, paleontology, anthropology, biomechanics and exercise physiology.
Considering that many people have not run for years or even decades is it any wonder why humans are now wracked with a variety of chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, heart failure and depression? We have increasingly separated ourselves from our genetic blueprint. We were designed to run.
I just finished Born to Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World has Never Seen on my recent West Coast road trip. I listened to the audio download version and stayed riveted to the story whenever I could get a spare moment with my iPod. The author Christopher McDougall begins with the question most runners ask themselves at some point. If running is so good for me why does something always hurt? Not just muscle stiffness from tough work outs, but genuine overuse injuries from the low back down to the heels. While exploration of associations between over-engineered running shoes and the explosion of running injuries the past 4 decades was provocative, McDougall primarily derives the answer to his question from his interactions with the Tarahumara Indians and a group of oddball American ultra-marathoners.
The Tarahumara are a mysterious people from the rugged and largely inaccessible Copper Canyons of Mexico whose ancient culture revolves around a love of running, and not just foot races through the village, but extraordinary runs of unfathomable distances for young and old alike. Yet, as intriguing as the Tarahmara and the eccentric American ultra-runners (shoed and barefoot) were in this book the sections I enjoyed most involved the discussions of evidence accumulated by a small group of scientists indicating that humans were designed to run long distances. This unique ability within the animal kingdom may explain how our species survived and thrived before developing tools despite being slow and relatively underdeveloped in terms of musculature. This has been, and may still be, the minority opinion when it comes to the origins of human locomotion, with walking being the favored explanation for our upright posture. Nevertheless, the evidence for long distance running as the means by which humans out competed their pre-historical counterparts is persuasive and is based on evidence obtained from multiple fields including comparative anatomy, paleontology, anthropology, biomechanics and exercise physiology.
Considering that many people have not run for years or even decades is it any wonder why humans are now wracked with a variety of chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, heart failure and depression? We have increasingly separated ourselves from our genetic blueprint. We were designed to run.
Saturday, August 01, 2009
Keep Your Laws (and Taxes) Off My Body
The WSJ Opinion Journal ran an editorial today arguing that “sin taxes” on snack foods would be ineffectual in curbing America’s ever expanding waistline. Indeed, there is considerable evidence that government interference in free markets have already contributed to the obesity epidemic through several mechanisms including agricultural subsidies on energy dense, nutrition sparse food products. Moreover, Washington’s instincts in the present health care debate are equally wrong-headed, including plans to remove provisions for insurers to risk-stratify individuals for coverage. Making it economically easier to remain obese will not help these patients or reduce health care costs, and will certainly not prevent future obesity.
Why shouldn’t individuals with the preventable conditions absorb the costs of their excesses? Why should airlines (or other industries) be forced to accommodate obese passengers by passing the cost of transporting these individuals onto other air travelers (not to mention the discomfort of an adjacent seat)? Why shouldn’t the obese fliers be required to pay for 2 seats? Better yet, why not let the airlines charge a fare by the pound? Why not let businesses reward their employees by reducing their health insurance contributions in exchange for life-style mediated changes such as weight loss? The WSJ editorialist correctly dismisses the possibility of a tax on obese people, but I am surprised that liberals have not found a way of working it into their cap and tax legislation since the more calories consumed the greater the C02 emitted.
Certainly, more government intervention is not the answer, rather government should dismiss ideas of further shielding people from the ultimate costs of their lifestyle decisions.
The WSJ Opinion Journal ran an editorial today arguing that “sin taxes” on snack foods would be ineffectual in curbing America’s ever expanding waistline. Indeed, there is considerable evidence that government interference in free markets have already contributed to the obesity epidemic through several mechanisms including agricultural subsidies on energy dense, nutrition sparse food products. Moreover, Washington’s instincts in the present health care debate are equally wrong-headed, including plans to remove provisions for insurers to risk-stratify individuals for coverage. Making it economically easier to remain obese will not help these patients or reduce health care costs, and will certainly not prevent future obesity.
Why shouldn’t individuals with the preventable conditions absorb the costs of their excesses? Why should airlines (or other industries) be forced to accommodate obese passengers by passing the cost of transporting these individuals onto other air travelers (not to mention the discomfort of an adjacent seat)? Why shouldn’t the obese fliers be required to pay for 2 seats? Better yet, why not let the airlines charge a fare by the pound? Why not let businesses reward their employees by reducing their health insurance contributions in exchange for life-style mediated changes such as weight loss? The WSJ editorialist correctly dismisses the possibility of a tax on obese people, but I am surprised that liberals have not found a way of working it into their cap and tax legislation since the more calories consumed the greater the C02 emitted.
Certainly, more government intervention is not the answer, rather government should dismiss ideas of further shielding people from the ultimate costs of their lifestyle decisions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
