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

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

ROBJETS Icon : (28 August 2014 - 09:36 PM) If they keep ZHill after this game I will be shocked.
ROBJETS Icon : (28 August 2014 - 09:38 PM) Philly gave us a worse ass whipping than Detroit gave Buffalo. only difference is we scored
ROBJETS Icon : (28 August 2014 - 09:42 PM) Im just wondering what manning will put up on our secondary? 70?
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:12 PM) who cares about getting destroyed in a preseason game, especially the 4th one. Most of these guys won't even make the team
ganggreen2003 Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:15 PM) Hill cut yet?
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:18 PM) FIRE IDZIK
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:21 PM) Yeah this game means nothing...except to Stephen Hill (who fumbled lol) and 115
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:23 PM) Hill is a bum, hes pretty much never shown much football skill. The Jets fucked up big time taking him over Alshon Jeffery.
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:29 PM) I'm still pissed off about that
ROBJETS Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:43 PM) Its not that Im worried about the preseason game itself. i could care less about that. Its the fact of how bad we got destroyed. And some of the guys will be on the team and others on the fringe so getting destroyed like that doesnt fill me with confidence
ROBJETS Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:44 PM) It would be one thing if it was just the second half or 4th quarter but this was the whole game. especially getting destroyed in the 1st quarter and at least part of the 2nd where a lot of the guys will be on the team
ROBJETS Icon : (28 August 2014 - 10:48 PM) 2nd and 3rd stringers making the team had something to prove and even our 2nd stringers got owned so yes Im very concerned. The first stringers need breaks and also if some of them get injured they need to step up. So no after this performance start to finish Im very concerned
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (29 August 2014 - 06:39 AM) Meh...you're reading too much into it
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (29 August 2014 - 06:40 AM) Even in seasons where the Jets blew, I haven't seen anyone refer to the preseason to complain. Ever.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (29 August 2014 - 09:15 AM) fire izdik http://theredzone.or...rs/Default.aspx
Jetsman05 Icon : (29 August 2014 - 11:17 AM) I picture Rob and 115 as real life friends
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (29 August 2014 - 04:01 PM) Holmes can still play, problem is that hes also a cancer. He wore out his welcome with the Jets
ganggreen2003 Icon : (29 August 2014 - 08:23 PM) did Hill get cut?
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (29 August 2014 - 09:00 PM) Haven't seen anything yet
MikeGangGree... Icon : (29 August 2014 - 09:06 PM) Whos ready for the season!!? WOOOOO
azjetfan Icon : (30 August 2014 - 11:54 AM) Hill has been cut
MikeGangGree... Icon : (30 August 2014 - 01:24 PM) Who wants to take bets he ends up in NE
ROBJETS Icon : (30 August 2014 - 02:18 PM) We'll I guess you guys are fools then in thinking im a fool for being concerned. Do any of you even know that in 2013 the Jets gave up the most passing yards in the franchise since 1986? And our secondary right now is worse than last year right now. To not be concerned is utterly foolish.
ROBJETS Icon : (30 August 2014 - 02:19 PM) Unless our d-line has a monstrous year odds are the team will be eaten up in the pass. Every team will game plan to exploit the pass this year.
ROBJETS Icon : (30 August 2014 - 02:56 PM) Patterson got cut
flood555 Icon : (30 August 2014 - 03:24 PM) Patterson must have been a huge cancer to get cut
flood555 Icon : (30 August 2014 - 03:26 PM) is there a midseason draft? we need a DB!
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (30 August 2014 - 03:58 PM) Our week 1 starting CBs will be Antonio Allen and Darrin Walls... wow
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (30 August 2014 - 03:58 PM) interesting that Simms and Boyd were released
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (30 August 2014 - 04:00 PM) No more McIntyre
ROBJETS Icon : (30 August 2014 - 05:20 PM) Pretty sure some of these cuts like Simms and McIntyre were made for removing some more cap space to try to find some decent corners and maybe another reliable wr. Possibly get some players cheap. I'd say the current 53 roster will change a good bit in the next week.
ROBJETS Icon : (30 August 2014 - 05:23 PM) I just hope Geno doesn't get hurt or we are horse f*cked. Vick sure as hell can't stay healthy for a full season. I guess the FO could also be think of picking up an old vet cut as 3rd qb. Simms is ok but I'd never trust him to win a regular season game if he was put in.
ROBJETS Icon : (30 August 2014 - 05:25 PM) Anyway it's going yo be an interesting week.
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (30 August 2014 - 10:18 PM) I doubt it was about freeing up money, considering we are way under. Like more than $20 mil, way more than enough to find some vet minimum CB
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (30 August 2014 - 10:19 PM) it's more about the roster numbers. McIntyre was replaced by rookies. IK showed flashes when he played
bleedsgreen Icon : (Yesterday, 08:34 AM) McIntyre is a shock to me he was a solid backup and made some big plays
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Yesterday, 04:44 PM) 1 week till we are 1-0
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Yesterday, 04:44 PM) we need to annihilate the GAYders
azjetfan Icon : (Yesterday, 05:28 PM) We claimed McFadden from the Browns. Knows the system should be able to contribute right away
azjetfan Icon : (Yesterday, 05:29 PM) Watching the Browns game now. Playing all three CB spots. Looks OK. A little grabby although he has not been called for it
azjetfan Icon : (Yesterday, 05:30 PM) Might be a little aggressive and get burnt over top
HarlemHxC814 Icon : (Yesterday, 10:26 PM) FIRE IDZIK
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (Today, 06:58 AM) ^^^ agreed
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Today, 12:25 PM) all the admins on this page should be fired
ganggreen2003 Icon : (Today, 12:25 PM) for being assclowns
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