NYJetsFan.com Forums: Interesting Article About Govt & Obesity - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets pick up option on Wilkerson
azjetfan Icon : (16 April 2014 - 03:34 PM) With all his legal issues and coming off injury he is done. Possibly even in the NFL
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 03:39 PM) Powell is average anyways.
Chaos Icon : (16 April 2014 - 03:39 PM) @ProFootballTalk 5m

Per source, Chris Johnson's two-year deal has a base value of $8 million, with another $1 million available in incentives based on yardage.
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 03:40 PM) He does a lot of things well, but isn't talented enough. Johnson has breakaway ability still and Ivory is man beast running the football
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 03:41 PM) We will get another WR in the draft. Even in round 2 you can get a starting WR
azjetfan Icon : (16 April 2014 - 04:09 PM) I am still standing by my CB in the first round and WR in the second prediction
santana Icon : (16 April 2014 - 05:19 PM) The title race is bale
azjetfan Icon : (16 April 2014 - 05:34 PM) Sidney rice coming in for a visit
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 05:49 PM) I think the Jets are getting themselves ready to draft best player available
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 05:49 PM) Last year they stuck to their board
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 06:27 PM) if they sign him I think that means they look to take a CB round 1
2JBallar01 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 06:32 PM) “@AdamSchefter: RB Chris Johnson's 2-year deal with Jets has a team option in it for year two. Jets have option to pick up year two at $4M in February 2015.”
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 06:51 PM) @AlbertBreer 2m
Sidney Rice has agreed to terms with the Seahawks on a one-year deal, per source.
Expand
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 06:55 PM) There is really only 2 CBs worth taking at 18
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 06:56 PM) I rather get a offensive playmaker
ganggreen2003 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 06:58 PM) LaMont Jordan was 34
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 06:59 PM) liar
ganggreen2003 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 07:05 PM) He wore #34 when he played for the JETS
ganggreen2003 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 07:05 PM) I should know I met him at an event in his last year with the JETS before he went to Oakland
ganggreen2003 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 07:05 PM) GFYS 0099 you shit talker
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 07:06 PM) http://www.nydailyne...entry-1.1758342
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 07:06 PM) there's no reason we can't have someone off this site on that list too
azjetfan Icon : (16 April 2014 - 07:08 PM) Rice resigned with Seattle
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (16 April 2014 - 07:08 PM) did you scare him into going to Oakland?
Chaos Icon : (16 April 2014 - 08:18 PM) unfortunately those sites are too much bigger than our
MikeGangGree... Icon : (16 April 2014 - 10:51 PM) WOOOO
santana Icon : (16 April 2014 - 11:01 PM) I'm sure it's possible but this isn't a blog site as much as its a login and yell about the jets site
santana Icon : (16 April 2014 - 11:01 PM) WOO
Chaos Icon : (17 April 2014 - 07:39 AM) yeah...TheGangGreen didn't participate either. they're represented as a forum too on Google
Jetsman05 Icon : (17 April 2014 - 01:11 PM) offesnive tehhhh
santana Icon : (17 April 2014 - 01:46 PM) 05 on point today
santana Icon : (17 April 2014 - 02:36 PM) lol
ganggreen2003 Icon : (17 April 2014 - 05:31 PM) It's 0099's favorite day of the year
ganggreen2003 Icon : (17 April 2014 - 05:32 PM) it's National High-5 day :WTF:
ganggreen2003 Icon : (17 April 2014 - 05:32 PM) who the hell high 5's people anymore
ganggreen2003 Icon : (17 April 2014 - 05:32 PM) just dap and leave it there
santana Icon : (17 April 2014 - 05:43 PM) everyone high 5s
santana Icon : (17 April 2014 - 05:44 PM) bubba watson when he won the masters last weekend went through a gauntlet of high 5s
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (17 April 2014 - 06:05 PM) GG03 is the high 5 master
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (17 April 2014 - 06:07 PM) FIRE IDZIK
Mr_Jet Icon : (17 April 2014 - 10:45 PM) People don't dap anymore either.
ganggreen2003 Icon : (18 April 2014 - 04:43 PM) Dapping is more manly than high 5ing which is really really really girly
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (18 April 2014 - 06:05 PM) gg03 doesn't like that people left him hanging
Jetsman05 Icon : (Today, 03:15 PM) liverpool potentially winning the league on my birthday
Jetsman05 Icon : (Today, 03:15 PM) cannot write that script
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • This topic is locked

Interesting Article About Govt & Obesity

#1 User is offline   bobzero11 Icon

  • Line Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 767
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 08 July 2005 - 11:02 PM

NYTIMES
http://www.nytimes.c...agewanted=print

July 8, 2005
Free to Choose Obesity?
By PAUL KRUGMAN

The obvious model for those hoping to reverse the fattening of America is the campaign against smoking. Before the surgeon general officially condemned smoking in 1964, rising cigarette consumption seemed an unstoppable trend; since then, consumption per capita has fallen more than 50 percent.

But it may be hard to match that success when it comes to obesity. I'm not talking about the inherent difficulty of the task - getting people to consume fewer calories and/or exercise more may be harder than getting people to stop smoking, but we won't know until we try. I'm talking, instead, about how the political winds have shifted.

Public health activists were successful in taking on smoking in part because at the time corporations didn't know how to play the public opinion game. By today's standards, the political ineptitude of Big Tobacco was awe-inspiring. In a famous 1971 interview on "Face the Nation," the chairman of the board of Philip Morris, confronted with evidence that smoking by mothers leads to low birth weight, replied, "Some women would prefer having smaller babies."

Today's food industry would never make that kind of mistake. In public, the industry's companies proclaim themselves good guys, committed to healthier eating. Meanwhile, they outsource the campaigns against medical researchers and the dissemination of crude anti-anti-obesity propaganda to industry-financed advocacy groups like the Center for Consumer Freedom.

More broadly, the ideological landscape has changed drastically since the 1960's. (That change in the landscape also has a lot to do with corporate financing of advocacy groups, but that's a tale for another article.) In today's America, proposals to do something about rising obesity rates must contend with a public predisposed to believe that the market is always right and that the government always screws things up.

You can see these predispositions at work in an article printed last month in Amber Waves, a magazine published by the Department of Agriculture. The article is titled "Obesity Policy and the Law of Unintended Consequences," suggesting that government efforts to combat obesity are likely to be counterproductive. But the authors don't actually provide any examples of how that might happen.

And the authors suggest, without quite asserting it, that because people freely choose obesity in a free market, it must be a good thing.

"Americans' rapid weight gain may have nothing to do with market failure," the article says. "It may be a rational response to changing technology and prices. ... If consumers willingly trade off increased adiposity for working indoors and spending less time in the kitchen as well as for manageable weight-related health problems, then markets are not failing."

How can medical experts who see obesity as a critical problem deal with an ideological landscape tilted in the direction of doing nothing?

One answer is to focus on the financial costs of obesity, and the fact that many of these costs fall on taxpayers and on the general insurance-buying public, rather than on the obese individuals themselves. (To their credit, the authors of the Amber Waves article do mention this issue, although they play it down.)

It is more important, however, to emphasize that there are situations in which "free to choose" is all wrong - and that this is one of them.

For one thing, the most rapid rise in obesity isn't taking place among adults, who, we hope, can understand the consequences of their decisions. It's taking place among children and adolescents.

And even if children weren't a big part of the problem, only a blind ideologue or an economist could argue with a straight face that Americans were rationally deciding to become obese. In fact, even many economists know better: the most widely cited recent economic analysis of obesity, a 2003 paper by David Cutler, Edward Glaeser and Jesse Shapiro of Harvard University, declares that "at least some food consumption is almost certainly not rational." It goes on to present evidence that even adults have clear problems with self-control.

Above all, we need to put aside our anti-government prejudices and realize that the history of government interventions on behalf of public health, from the construction of sewer systems to the campaign against smoking, is one of consistent, life-enhancing success. Obesity is America's fastest-growing health problem; let's do something about it.
IPB Image<<<Don't know how to update this thing...
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • This topic is locked

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users