Mumsnet Talk

First they came for....

What next? No treatment for people with cancer unless their lives were the perfection of healthiness? No treatment for a baby not aborted for disability. Your choice to have it buster. Questions if you are hit by a car to make sure you were completely attentative?

People are now conditioned against disabled people, unemployed people and now overweight people. Who next?

Agree with werewolves, Sunny and free, they are trying to get us to pigeonhole people so that they can divide and rule us and cut our benefits, treatment and services.

Good points by InExit, where will it end? Sporting accidents, reckless driving, it is never ending the ways in which they could benefits and treatment. They may even foirce us to insure against all of these things one by one so that the finance industry can make more money off us all.

Kendodd^You think cutting peoples benefits is in any way comparable to the murder of 12 million people?^

It was 6 million, and one of the very first things they did was demand that all Jews hand in their radios. RADIOS, yep such an innocent request. And that is how it starts.

Should Add, I agree with Claig, word for word on everything she has said. bang on the nose.

This is about two things, corporate profits from cheaper food manufacturing and hooking people on these foods and making the case that the state (already broke from years of corporate greed) must be shrunk and everything must be privatised. It's no accident that people on low incomes are often spending less on food but are actually more likely to be over weight.

The articicle Claig linked to in the Mail was good factually, but why is it illustrated by pictures of women only? Eating puddings? With their legs on show? BECAUSE WOMEN ARE DISGUSTING GREEDY FATTEYS (Men don't count)

There is a very twisted sort of logic here.

"All these fat scroungers are sitting on their couches stuffing their useless faces all day long and costing the state money. Let's take away their housing benefit, so they don't have a home with a couch any more! Then they won't be able to sit on it eating biscuits, and they'll lose weight and the problem of obesity will be miraculously cured!"

If such a scheme were implemented, would they recalculate the level of benefits deemed enough to survive on, to account for the proportion of one's meagre allowance that must be given to private gym companies in order to retain one's eligibility for benefits? Or would we be expected to spend the money put aside for the gas bill or the week's food on attending the gym or risk ending up homeless?

Lunacy. Sheer lunacy. And it scares the hell out of me that some people can't see what's wrong with the idea.

Exercise on referral (or prescription) IS FREE if it's NHS if it's ran through a council it's at a subsidised rate. But it isn't as simple as 'just give them free exercise' there are loads of contraindications to exercise that some obese people meet and as a result a gym wouldn't touch them. Also a lot of GPs still dot refer patients. I work in exercise referral for a PCT and we have a whole gp surgery that refuse to refer patients even though they WANT to do it but without that gp signature they can't

Why a gym? Why does it have to be at a gym? Gyms here are expensive or offer such limited opening hours. The mentality that you can't lose weight without going to a gym needs to be challenged.

Wasn't it 12 million people? Six million Jews and six million others, gypsies, gays, others.

For some reason the 'others' are always forgotten.

they are trying to get us to pigeonhole people so that they can divide and rule us and cut our benefits, treatment and services.

^^
THIS

expat:

- exercise has minimal impact on weight loss at all (at least in the traditionally recommended cardio forms) so the whole formula is misguided in thsi very simplistic sense
- but it is good for you and can be helpful for morale - and if you are very overweight you may benefit greatly from a swimming pool, or being introduced to certain pieces of kit that you use in a certain way so they will not be dangerous
- I wanted to join a gym because my normal forms of non-gym exercise were not possible with spd and I hoped to use a pool or maybe try a cross trainer or something

I agree, mony people don't need to join a gym to get some physical activity, but some people need help

"You think cutting peoples benefits is in any way comparable to the murder of 12 million people?"

And I stand by this. I think comparing people having benefits cut because they won't go to the gym (not that I agree with that) with Nazism is offensive.

the 'others' were first disabled people. demonised as useless eaters sponging off the hard working family. Look up T4/Hadamar. Then other undesirables like gypsies etc. And not a peep was raised so then they went after the jews.
Very insiduous and creeping. demonising 'the other', setting them apart from 'you'. And no fuss raised. And then one day its 'you'.
Hence the poem.

'I agree, mony people don't need to join a gym to get some physical activity, but some people need help'

Some people need help with a lot of things regarding their health - look at the eating/food threads on here. But there's eternally the question of who should or is able to pay for that.

Is it Kendodd when 73 disabled people A WEEK are committing suicide or dying soon after their disability benefits are removed.
Each week.

"73 disabled people A WEEK are committing suicide or dying soon after their disability benefits are removed"

Where did you get this? Not disputing it, interested.

Black Triangle and there's a website that lists all names but I have forgotten what its called.

kendodd

I haven't read this link but it refers to the statistic quoted and comes from the DWP.

Link is here.

Appaluses claig,
bang on.

The amount of fructose-sucrose stuff in food is rotten.

I can't see this being legal. If something is medically prescribed it is nobody's business except the patient's and their medical professionals'.

It's yet another piece of inflammatory bullshit designed to get us all squabbling amongst ourselves and demonising each other. Don't fall for it, it's government trolling .

If a patient is to be denied a certain treatment because of obesity, smoking or whatever then that should be a clinical decision made by qualified medical professionals and based on the benefits and risks for that patient.

Claig you are right on the money!

I don't claim benefits but I am fat through a combination of health problems and not watching what I ate during bad health times (I had a big health decline following DDs birth with very under active thyroid and anaemia and since Dx with SLE and APS after having mulitple MCS). If I were to ever claim benefits I would find it very discriminatory if my own lifestyle was a factor in whether I could claim despite working and paying my taxes for 14 years now and the average drug addict or alcoholic or smoker etc would not have the same treatment if they are of normal weight... I imagine that the long term effects of their lifestyles would rival obesity in NHS costs and yet benefits have remained untouched by the beady government scrutiny.
I don't drink, smoke or take drugs, I watch what I eat and find it extremely hard to lose weight. Funny that...it was ever so easy to pile on nearly 3 stone in 6 months but it has taken me 6 years to lose less than 1 stone...
People demonising fat people need to remember that it is ALOT harder to lose weight than it is to gain it. Add into the mix, pre-existing medical conditions, depression, lack of money for the healthier food, lack of health education or any other reason it may be that little bit harder for the individual...
Plus...the prescribed gym memberships are for COUNCIL gyms in my area and a fee is required so, money is taken for these "fatties" being fat and they are sent the gym...then they have to pay out more of their money to the gym and therefore the COUNCIL and the added exercise may then cause issues in itself - joint and muscle pains of a person carrying 6+ stone of extra weight can be debilitating, stopping them going to the gym a second time that week... Therefore they look like fat, lazy scroungers and feed into the point the government are trying to steer us toward. It wouldn't come as a great surprise to see fat taxes and suchlike in the future...for every extra lb over a golden, weight-related number, you have to pay £1 so you don't cost the government millions with your disgusting, fat, face-stuffing ways...

I can think of nothing more likely to prevent me from seeking medical help (should I need it) than the fear of being forced to exercise in a public gym.

So I would probably stop going to the GP for my repeat prescription (which I pay for) of blood pressure medication. Which is fine - NHS will save money etc. etc. - until such time as I have a stroke or heart attack and become physically too ill to exercise.

Right, piprabbit, it's not like compulsory school PE ever turned anyone on to sport who didn't like it already. It is probably the single greatest cause of truancy in fact!