Interesting one this. I have seen a bunch of TV trailers advertising a programme about this guy and to be honest have been fairly repelled both by his obesity but also by his loath-able self pity. Anyway, story follows:
Daily Express wrote: BRITAIN'S fattest man, who once weighed 70 stone, is planning to sue the NHS for his weight gain, it was revealed today. Paul Mason, 50, received life-saving gastric surgery in 2009 which reduced his weight to a comparatively small 37 stone but he claims he was not given the right medical advice before it became to late. The former postman, who consumed 20,000 calories a day, eight times as much as the average man, said he sought help from his GP after ballooning to 30 stone. But instead of receiving help to manage his weight, he said he was told in 1996 to: 'Ride your bike more'. His care, which cost UK taxpayers an estimated £100,000 a year and topped £1million in 2009 included a specially made reinforced ambulance to carry Mr Mason to hospital. Mr Mason also adds that he was sent to a dietician, rather than the eating disorders specialist he had asked to see, after his weight hit 64 stone. He told a tabloid newspaper: "I want to set a precedent so no one else has to get to the same size - and to put something back into society." An NHS spokesman said of the purported lawsuit: "As we have not heard from Mr Mason, it would be inappropriate to speculate." At the time of Mr Mason's operation, Matthew Elliott, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance said such patients should contribute to the cost of their surgery. He said: “Sad though it is, this is clearly unfair to other NHS users, who will bear the brunt of subsequent cuts. “Why should some people who have done their best to stay healthy miss out on life-saving drugs when others get huge amounts spent on them?”
I guess it is yet another example of the creeping blame culture in this country. Why bother to take responsibility for your own actions when it is easier and more profitable to blame it on someone else?
I have to confess a certain amount of surprise at the amount of money spent on caring for this guy, all the more shocking when one considers that NICE make life and death decisions constantly over cancer drugs that could prolong people's lives yet here there is a guy draining the NHS of hundreds of thousands of pounds, not through illness but through his own gluttony and inaction.
I don't suppose this is an isolated case either. The NHS really should have a policy on withdrawing care in certain circumstances too, I feel. No use chucking good money after bad because then everyone loses out.
I'm sorry, but everyone has the right to help and assistance, no matter what.
Having said that, how the hell did he allow himself to reach such a size? It should be the first question asked, "Did someone force you to eat this food?", well go and sue them, not the NHS.
AndrewC wrote:I'm sorry, but everyone has the right to help and assistance, no matter what.
Why? He reached this weight of his own volition, nothing more. And this was after he had already had gastric band treatment. At what point do you stop and say that you have to help yourself just as much as help the NHS.
AndrewC wrote:Having said that, how the hell did he allow himself to reach such a size? It should be the first question asked, "Did someone force you to eat this food?", well go and sue them, not the NHS.
Cheers
Andrew
Because if that were the case, he would be suing himself. This is the point I am trying to make - this is self inflicted. Of course, he should be given some support and treatment but why should this guy become a literal and metaphorical black hole to chuck money into especially when it comes at the cost of other people's treatments?
filbert wrote:Why? He reached this weight of his own volition, nothing more. And this was after he had already had gastric band treatment.
He actually got to 60+ stone before his gastric band treatment. After the treatment and at least one surgery to chop a bulge off his leg so he could stand, he lost weight to get down to 37 stone.
One thing that really annoyed me was that when he had the surgery, he found out that his health assistance benefits (or whatever they are called) were being cut so he could not have his carer with him all day and he threw a massive hissy fit and threw stuff around (from his hospital bed) and started crying (for about the 300th time during the show).
Medium of Death wrote:Right, so this fat mess is draining resources away from others, somehow deserving more care than them?
As opposed to your "It's his fault so him!"
He is essentially terminally ill. In the sense that, without medical assistance, he will die.
So be it.
Right, so does that mean cancer victims, being terminally ill should be sent home and free up beds?
filbert wrote:Because if that were the case, he would be suing himself. This is the point I am trying to make - this is self inflicted. Of course, he should be given some support and treatment but why should this guy become a literal and metaphorical black hole to chuck money into especially when it comes at the cost of other people's treatments?
Exactly, the only person he has to blame is himself, if he doesn't want to make himself better then that's his lookout. But that does not allow anyone the right to withdraw help.
filbert wrote:Why? He reached this weight of his own volition, nothing more. And this was after he had already had gastric band treatment.
He actually got to 60+ stone before his gastric band treatment. After the treatment and at least one surgery to chop a bulge off his leg so he could stand, he lost weight to get down to 37 stone.
I stand corrected but the point still stands that he has squandered the opportunity of treatment given to him. Its akin to a cancer patient being given chemo and then starting smoking again after the treatment is finished.
Andrew C wrote:Exactly, the only person he has to blame is himself, if he doesn't want to make himself better then that's his lookout. But that does not allow anyone the right to withdraw help.
BrookM wrote:Wasn't this the guy who WANTED to be the fattest blob in the UK? I'd say hire a crane and hoist him back to the sea.
Don't think so. There was an article in the paper recently about a woman who was deliberately eating to become fat and break the record (US's fattest woman? I can't remember exactly) but not this guy.
Anyway, so this guy get help from the NHS which is supported by taxpayer money and drains resources from the system then decided to sue NHS which costs more tax payer money....
His suing of the state, after it's attempts to help his sorry and inconceivably large ass, is a measure of the worth this creature offers as a citizen of the nation.
I therefore reiterate my previous statement.
Throw the fat fether into the streets and reclaim all possessions in order to try and claw back some of the wasted money. Perhaps that will burn off some of his fat reserves...
Medium of Death wrote:I'm talking about somebody who has inflicted this upon themselves, through greed. Why should so much be spent on somebody like this?
Your cancer patient statement is clearly just BS because you have nothing else to say.
Unlike your calm reasoned response?
So lets tell all the abulance crews to avoid Sauchihall Street or Rose Street on a weekend then. Or all the lung cancer patients. "Smoker?, sorry self inflicted just go home."
Medium of Death wrote:I'm talking about somebody who has inflicted this upon themselves, through greed. Why should so much be spent on somebody like this?
Your cancer patient statement is clearly just BS because you have nothing else to say.
Unlike your calm reasoned response?
So lets tell all the abulance crews to avoid Sauchihall Street or Rose Street on a weekend then. Or all the lung cancer patients. "Smoker?, sorry self inflicted just go home."
Andrew
Hey guess what if you drink constantly and have ruined your liver chances are your not going to get a doner unless you stop drinking, this is clearly someone who has abused the system and see's it as a right that he should be able to drain resources from the system.
Gibbsey wrote:Hey guess what if you drink constantly and have ruined your liver chances are your not going to get a doner unless you stop drinking, this is clearly someone who has abused the system and see's it as a right that he should be able to drain resources from the system.
And yet, despite not getting a replacement liver they will still get medical treatment for the other conditions arising from that organ failure. Which is not what some are proposing.
Gibbsey wrote:Hey guess what if you drink constantly and have ruined your liver chances are your not going to get a doner unless you stop drinking, this is clearly someone who has abused the system and see's it as a right that he should be able to drain resources from the system.
And yet, despite not getting a replacement liver they will still get medical treatment for the other conditions arising from that organ failure. Which is not what some are proposing.
PS. I have no sympathy for this individual what so ever. The condition is completely self inflicted and as so he has to take responsibility for his actions. I as a tax payer do not want my cash going to make his life any easier, nor do I think he should be receiving any additional benefits to meet his own failings. However, it is a National Health Service, anyone should have access to it.
AndrewC wrote:However, it is a National Health Service, anyone should have access to it.
Because it isn't an infinite source of funds, time, material and personnel to waste trying to help people who can't be bothered to help themselves.
In the same way that not every new-fangled drug can be prescribed to everyone - tough decisions have to be taken on a daily basis. How is this any different? I would be pretty cheesed off if I was a cancer sufferer and had been told that my local NHS authority would not fund a new life saving drug and then reading about the funding wasted on this slug.
MGS, the more you post, the more you sound like a Tory. I'm glad too see you are resisting your programming!
I don't think you should be able to sue the NHS. You should have to sign a disclaimer before any treatment. If you don't like it, feth off and go private.
filbert wrote:Because it isn't an infinite source of funds, time, material and personnel to waste trying to help people who can't be bothered to help themselves.
In the same way that not every new-fangled drug can be prescribed to everyone - tough decisions have to be taken on a daily basis. How is this any different? I would be pretty cheesed off if I was a cancer sufferer and had been told that my local NHS authority would not fund a new life saving drug and then reading about the funding wasted on this slug.
But that individual is still able to get pallative(?) care. The trend being exhibited here is the proposal that this idividual not be allowed access to a doctor at all.
AndrewC wrote:The trend being exhibited here is the proposal that this idividual not be allowed access to a doctor at all.
Andrew
That's not what I suggested or inferred. All I am saying is that there should be a cut off point when it is clear that the guy is not helping himself in addition to the treatment.
As I said, chucking good money after bad.
Some may advocate that he shouldn't receive any care from the word go because his obesity is self-inflicted. The problem with that is where do you draw the line? Technically, a smoker who contracts cancer is self inflicted given the overwhelming evidence that smoking is bad but I think it would take a cold hearted individual to turn a cancer patient away from hospital because 'cigarettes are bad and you should have known better'.
The example given by this guy is not that he is obese (which is bad for a start) but rather that he continues to not help his situation and to ignore advice and help given, instead choosing to blame others and wallow in self pity for his condition.
It is a sad state of affairs that this guy is prepared to put effort into suing the organisation that has helped him, rather than putting his effort towards avoiding needing that level of help in the first place.
As for the advice of his GP, at what point is reccomending regular exercise to someone who wants to lose weight (with no underlying medical problems) a bad idea?
Unfortunately regardless of the outcome this will cost the tax payer tens of thousands more for the court case as this chubby leach will undoubtedly be relying on legal aid to fund his action.
I don't understand how a person becomes so obese they require surgery. Wouldn't it cross your mind that maybe you should try doing something about your weight before it got to that point?
So, he brought this upon himself, and he got help, and decided to sue the NHS anyway? That's some douche behavior there. I mean, if he was willing to lose weight instead, I wouldn't mind if he was getting help. But what he's doing is just wasteful.
In all seriousness, I have no sympathy at all for this guy.
It really isn't that hard to just say, "You know what? I shall eat an apple instead of this quadruple bacon chili burger, and then I shall go for a brisk run."
I find it funny how its other peoples fault the dude couldnt stop stuffing whole chickens down his own throat. And "ride your bike more" how is that bad advice? Hell my doctor said the same thing to me
doc oh so you have bike you ride
me yea I ride it often
doc oh well thats good, you should really try and ride once a day, thatll help you out alot
me thanks doc, now Im going to sue you because you didnt take my hand and forcefully show me how to stop being a huge fat ass
Oh wait Im confusing what I was told, to what the huge fatass said
Gibbsey wrote:also how many calories a day what the hell was he eating?
20,000 according to the article. I dunno, deep fried twinkies and whole Turduckens?
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
Basically everything to excess.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
I saw a show on extremely obese people once (mainly to make myself feel better about being a bit over weight lol) and those people were doing 20k-40k a day eating habits. It was insane, they would eat like an entire large pizza, a BAG of chips and a 2 liter of pop (cola for non Michigan folk) just for lunch. A couple 3 bagels with a BLOCK of creme cheese 4 or 6 eggs coffee and a jug of OJ for breakfast and something like a whole chicken a pound or 2 of potatoes+gravy same insane amount of drink and that wasnt counting snacks throughout the day. Simply disgusting
Good lord. I mean if he was eating something worth actually eating I might get it but how messed up in the head do you have to be to shovel 20 bags of chips and 20 chocolate bars in your pie hole every fething day? Even if he did nothing else getting rid of all that would have to count for a couple of stone even if he did nothing else.
Gibbsey wrote:also how many calories a day what the hell was he eating?
20,000 according to the article. I dunno, deep fried twinkies and whole Turduckens?
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
Basically everything to excess.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
Jesus Christ. This is what a dietician is for. Eating disorder my ass, this fether just didn't know to really tell himself enough was enough. This guy should be dropped off a Buddhist monastery so he can starve to death. Is this common in the UK?
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
That's the disgusting part. He obviously wasn't going out and getting this food for himself. Somebody actually had to go and prepare it for him. Carer? More like Death Dealer.
a 2 liter of pop (cola for non Michigan folk)
I still don't understand. West Coast vernacular please!
AndrewC wrote:I'm sorry, but everyone has the right to help and assistance, no matter what.
I'm all for the government donating a bike to him and giving him information on where to buy healthy foods. Hell, I'd even go so far as to support a care giver to assist him in healthy food preperation and an exercise regimen.
I do NOT think he is entitled to medical care on the tax payer dime, nor is he entitled to lum sums of money. This level of obesity is not genetic, its not inflicted by someone else, and its not the responsibility of the state.
Fattie ride a bike and eat apples instead of burgers. Also, poop more. I shudder to think how much impacted feces is lurking inside his lower intestine. God, what a disgusting human being.
Apparently he only weighed 56 stone when they actually weighed him (my wife has just informed me). The figures quoted were suppositions before he was actually weighed (on some scales that were specially made for the task).
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
That's the disgusting part. He obviously wasn't going out and getting this food for himself. Somebody actually had to go and prepare it for him. Carer? More like Death Dealer.
a 2 liter of pop (cola for non Michigan folk)
I still don't understand. West Coast vernacular please!
Oh crap, Im terrible with this uhm....a coka cola? Pepsi cola? A carbonated beverage normally found in a plastic bottle? Habla English?
Oh jesus, I remember watching a show on TLC about this guy a couple of years ago!
The massive disgusting breakfasts and live in fast food gopher were mind boggling. My mother is a desicion writer for the Office of Hearings and Appeals here in the US, its the branch of the gov that reads medical statements and determines eligibility for federal disability payment. I remember her being sickened by the fact that this guy is legally disabled through self inflicted deformity. Sadly, in our current system this kind of thing DOES get paid for by society. Honestly, as liberal as I am I think this is a contributing factor to the economic crapstorm we're in right now.
While society should support its weakest members, there is a line of self regulation and responsibility that each citizen should have. This man has neither a sense of personal pride, nor a sense of civic duty. In short, his willful actions to remove himself from the labor pool have resulted in a citizen that is parasitic and contributes nothing positive to the fabric of society.
Get real fattie, Hawking can't even move his pinkie and he's sired more than one child. Whats your excuse?
Gibbsey wrote:also how many calories a day what the hell was he eating?
20,000 according to the article. I dunno, deep fried twinkies and whole Turduckens?
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
Basically everything to excess.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
so not only is this ass a leach on the healthcare system but also the welfare system? Honestly if he can afford that much on welfare they should of cut it so he can go wallow in self pity some more
Also i think labeling his "condition" a "mental disorder" so they can watch him and regulate his food would be a good move
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
That's the disgusting part. He obviously wasn't going out and getting this food for himself. Somebody actually had to go and prepare it for him. Carer? More like Death Dealer.
a 2 liter of pop (cola for non Michigan folk)
I still don't understand. West Coast vernacular please!
Oh crap, Im terrible with this uhm....a coka cola? Pepsi cola? A carbonated beverage normally found in a plastic bottle? Habla English?
Coke. Its all called coke. If I go to the store and buy a Sprite, I got a coke.
Typical southern conversation.
"Hey, I'mma go get some cokes. You want any?"
"Yeah."
"What kind?"
"Dr Pepper."
Ahh thanks for the heads up. I meant coke earlier Here in Michigan any of those is called a pop. Only state I know of anyways that calls them pop. Trips outside of the mitten gets funny at restaurants
AndrewC wrote:I'm sorry, but everyone has the right to help and assistance, no matter what.
I'm all for the government donating a bike to him and giving him information on where to buy healthy foods. Hell, I'd even go so far as to support a care giver to assist him in healthy food preperation and an exercise regimen.
I do NOT think he is entitled to medical care on the tax payer dime, nor is he entitled to lum sums of money. This level of obesity is not genetic, its not inflicted by someone else, and its not the responsibility of the state.
Fattie ride a bike and eat apples instead of burgers. Also, poop more. I shudder to think how much impacted feces is lurking inside his lower intestine. God, what a disgusting human being.
What good is a bike going to do . He weighs 1/2 ton as soon as he sits on it, the wheels will buckle. And the frame will disappear up his arse.
Sadly, for him to get this big he had to have an enabler. I'm not sure what a carer is, but if this person kept feeding this maniac, then they were offering him no "care".
I recall watching a program on people with a medical condition that was the equivalent of not having an "off-swtich". Something that tells the brain that they are full or satiated. Perhaps that was part of this man's problem.
Regardless, just because he's sueing doesn't mean he'll actually get anything. You can always find a lawyer that will take your case, however foolish or weak your claims might be. They get paid either way. Him winning this case is another matter entirely.
If the "carer" was the person buying all of his food, he'd have a stronger case sueing the "carer" than the doctor.
Gibbsey wrote:also how many calories a day what the hell was he eating?
20,000 according to the article. I dunno, deep fried twinkies and whole Turduckens?
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
Basically everything to excess.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
I'd like to see him sectioned under Section 3 of the mental health act, perhaps under the aegis of consistent and ongoing suicide attempt via eating, wherein his care could be turned over to a relative or the state and we could simply prohibit him from the current food inhalation pattern. All his finances would be placed with a relative or health worker re power of attorney.
His diet is then restricted, he is forced to lose the weight. Short term cost but long term gain.
kronk wrote:Sadly, for him to get this big he had to have an enabler. I'm not sure what a carer is, but if this person kept feeding this maniac, then they were offering him no "care".
I recall watching a program on people with a medical condition that was the equivalent of not having an "off-swtich". Something that tells the brain that they are full or satiated. Perhaps that was part of this man's problem.
Regardless, just because he's sueing doesn't mean he'll actually get anything. You can always find a lawyer that will take your case, however foolish or weak your claims might be. They get paid either way. Him winning this case is another matter entirely.
If the "carer" was the person buying all of his food, he'd have a stronger case sueing the "carer" than the doctor.
The carer is employed by the state, the state gets sued.
Its loose loose for the UK tax payer.
Thank god that for every Fatty McFatfat a hundred or a thousand deserving cases are helped when the system cocks up.
the guy had costly surgery(NHS OF COURSE)AND THEN STARTED BANGING THE WEIGHT BACK ON.so now he feels let down by doctors etc and is somehow the good guy in all this.WHAT A JOKE.if this was an alcoholic or druggie there wouldnt be any of this in the media.
He is exploiting the media in the same way that everyone else who doesn't work and gets rich does. Kerry Katona, Jordan, Peter bloomin Andre, that waste of breath Victoria Beckham etc etc, reality TV stars who do frack all every day but get's rich doing it.
The media love a case such as this because it brings out the emotions. Normally one of hate but it does get people talking.
I'm utterly sickened by the fact that this guy DID THIS TO HIMSELF!!!!!! What kind of morbid human being acts like that? I mean christ 20k calories? I doubt I consume that much in a week...and I eat lots of candy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Medium of Death wrote:
MeanGreenStompa wrote:Shoot the bastard and rend him into fertiliser for 3rd world crops.
Now, now. Bullets cost money. A syringe full of air into his veins should do the job.
Arrest the POS for conspiracy to defraud the government (the cost of his surgery and care since he clearly has no interest in losing weight) and put him in jail. He'll either lose the weight or die. Either is fine.
The outrage over the lawsuit has overshadowed that fact that he did have a valid point:
The former postman, who consumed 20,000 calories a day, eight times as much as the average man, said he sought help from his GP after ballooning to 30 stone.
But instead of receiving help to manage his weight, he said he was told in 1996 to: 'Ride your bike more'.
He went to the NHS for help and was told to exercise more. That like telling an alcoholic to stop drinking or a gambling addict to stop gambling, ultimately its what they need to do, but more help is needed.
People who are obese arre entitled to help in terms of diet pills and other aids that can help them. I was under the body mass index to qualify (18 stone and heavy built) and so could not get this support, this guy very clearly qualified at 30 stone. Fatties and people who are potential fatties need more than just a diet, they need real help. Once the pounds are on getting them off is hard and without results its all too easy to give up. Support was required, at the time he wasn't given much of any.
That much is fair, beyond that he is on his own.
Let him sue, as far as we are aware no-one force fed him and he was obviously aware of the consequences of overeating as the symptoms do not appear overnight. Let him have his day in court, lose and become an object lesson.
My only concern is if he is getting legal aid to do this. Maybe he is, maybe he isnt, people who have clear need of a state lawyer often can't get one, people with a dogma drum to beat are high on the queue to do, free of charge. Fatties are not generally seen as a disadvantaged minority, and he isn't ethnic so its quite possible he will have to fund himself. On the other hand he might be able to play the disabled card to drag this out at taxpayers expense.
Orlanth wrote:
He went to the NHS for help and was told to exercise more. That like telling an alcoholic to stop drinking or a gambling addict to stop gambling, ultimately its what they need to do, but more help is needed.
Exactly.
The one caveat being that, unlike alcohol and gambling, man needs food to survive; making compulsive eating one of the single most difficult psychological addictions to overcome.
As someone with a pretty strong background in addiction medicine my professional opinion based on evidence I've seen both in classrooms and in facilities I've worked in.....YOU DON"T GET ADDICTED TO EATING FOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously, people that compare process addictions and compulsive behavior (like over eating) to drug addiction are really missing the mark.
So the guy has problems, I think its accepted that anyone willing to turn themselves into a human maggot is a little cracked. I don't think society should be footing the bill for this guy in any way. He did this to himself.
But if you want to use the drug comparison I guess its acceptable for society to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a crackhead to get surgery related to helping him stop smoking crack right>?
Peter Wiggin wrote:
Seriously, people that compare process addictions and compulsive behavior (like over eating) to drug addiction are really missing the mark.
Why? Its been widely shown that process addiction is often accompanied by serotonin release, and withdrawal symptoms similar to those that arise from drug addiction.
Here is a review of research from the journal Appetite.
Peter Wiggin wrote:
So the guy has problems, I think its accepted that anyone willing to turn themselves into a human maggot is a little cracked. I don't think society should be footing the bill for this guy in any way. He did this to himself.
So do drug addicts, and we regularly foot the bill for them. In fact, due to the costs associated with dealing with the deceased, we really have no choice but to foot the bill for all of this in some sense.
Though, granted, drug addicts tend to be more of an issue due to the cost of otherwise policing them, and their suppliers.
Peter Wiggin wrote:
But if you want to use the drug comparison I guess its acceptable for society to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a crackhead to get surgery related to helping him stop smoking crack right>?
Sure, why not? We pay for the care of the sick all the time, and while they may not have consciously chosen to become sick, they are, through their bodies, still responsible for being sick.
Unless we're not going to classify addiction as a sickness, which is also a popular line of reasoning.
Oh you poor bleeding hearts! I feel sorry for you feeling sorry for the guy. I cant believe your country raised his help to accommodate for his 20k cal a day diet. Personally that was a wrong move on their part. But getting to brass tacks fellas, the guy fed himself to that size. He willingly shoved all that food down his throat. THEN he got gastric surgery to fix the problem, and then gained MORE weight. So thats the countries fault how? Im pretty sure govt. offcials didnt go down to his house and say hey fatty? Why you loosing weight? Eat more cake. HERE Ill make it for you.
Total BS, the guy screwed himself. If he has a mental disorder then he needs to be treated for it, not sue everyone for it being their fault so he can continue doing nothing but eating
I don't think we should pay the medical bills of folks that develop lung cancer from smoking, liver disease from drinking, being fat from over eating etc. I am ALL for preventative treatment, counseling, etc but its not the job of the medical community to counter act your own willful stupidity and its damn sure not the responsibility of the taxpayers to enable your fat ass to eat a box of ding dongs for breakfast.
He asked the doc's for help, they told him how to lose weight. He continutes to eat whole cows covered in bacon grease. Too bad, so sad. Fattie must feed himself now.
Gastric bypass surgery is absolutely disgusting. It made Forest Whitaker skinny, and that is horrible.
I dunno, I definitely want the NHS to take care of people with mental conditions. If addictive eating is a mental disorder, then I want him refered to a counsellor rather than told to get on his bike. Telling someone with a behavioural disorder to "stop doing it" and then being all righteous at them when they fail is a knobend stance. It's pretty understandable though- the mentally ill are still treated with disdain in most parts of the world. I had thought Americans in general were more openminded, maybe not american wargamers though .
Saying that, I also think he is being a complete arsewipe by suing the NHS- surely he can sue the doctor who gave him the advice, but he won't do that, because he won't get as much attention or potenially, money. Bullgak.
"Behavioral addiction" isn't really accepted as a diagnosis these days. Its been proposed for the DSM-V, but currently things like this are viewed as one of a few things.
1. Genetic disorder, yes some folks have jacked up glands and require medical help.
2. Symptomatic behavior brought on by another diagnosis (IE Somatoform or Anxiety disorders most likely)
3. Impulse control disorders
4. Possible EDNOS 307.50....IE Eating disorder not otherwise specified
I'd hazard to say that this guy falls into the impulse control disorder spectrum, which would require a clinical treatment regimen incorporating counseling for the behavioral aspect, and DIET WITH EXERCISE for the physical portion.
Gastric bypass is an abomination in my eyes. Right up there with the Vomitoriums of ancient Rome.
Well, okay, I'm not down with the technical lingo. But it still stands as a point that there is a treatment for this sort of thing that isn't "go cycle your bike more" which involves seeing the right specialist.
If we put it another way, if you injured yourself playing contact sports, and went to the doctor about it, and he said "Take it easy on that leg" and you tried your best to do so, but ended up with soft tissue damage because what you REALLY needed was to be refered to a sports injury physiotherapist, you'd be pretty damn pissed off- I mean, you pay your taxes into the NHS like anybody, amirite? Even welfare recipients pay VAT.
I bet there'd be more sympathy for what is, in essence, a self inflicted injury, because you're not a repulsive tub of goddamned lard. Should we stop treating people who cause injury to themselves through risky hobbies? What do the sportsmen of dakka think?
Gibbsey wrote:also how many calories a day what the hell was he eating?
20,000 according to the article. I dunno, deep fried twinkies and whole Turduckens?
From what I remember from the program about him, it was something like 20 packs of crisps, ditto chocolate bars, fried breakfast (full pack of bacon, 4 eggs, fried toast, etc), sausage rolls and other such things, ham and cheese etc sandwiches, and whatever he has for dinner.
Basically everything to excess.
But the worst thing is that he doesn't have a job, so all that food is paid for by tax payers, and he had a full time carer who prepared it all for him and helped stuff it into his maw.
I'd like to see him sectioned under Section 3 of the mental health act, perhaps under the aegis of consistent and ongoing suicide attempt via eating, wherein his care could be turned over to a relative or the state and we could simply prohibit him from the current food inhalation pattern. All his finances would be placed with a relative or health worker re power of attorney.
His diet is then restricted, he is forced to lose the weight. Short term cost but long term gain.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also...
Got any popcorn?
That's one of the most depressing things I've ever seen in my life.
Da Boss wrote:Well, okay, I'm not down with the technical lingo. But it still stands as a point that there is a treatment for this sort of thing that isn't "go cycle your bike more" which involves seeing the right specialist.
If we put it another way, if you injured yourself playing contact sports, and went to the doctor about it, and he said "Take it easy on that leg" and you tried your best to do so, but ended up with soft tissue damage because what you REALLY needed was to be refered to a sports injury physiotherapist, you'd be pretty damn pissed off- I mean, you pay your taxes into the NHS like anybody, amirite? Even welfare recipients pay VAT.
I bet there'd be more sympathy for what is, in essence, a self inflicted injury, because you're not a repulsive tub of goddamned lard. Should we stop treating people who cause injury to themselves through risky hobbies? What do the sportsmen of dakka think?
Please go back and read my comment. Essentially I said that its fine to tell fattie to ride a bike. Give him a real dietician, get the guy some counseling for his behavioral concerns, and if he continues to eat 5 rashers of bacon every morning, cut him off.
HE GOT FAT AFTER GASTRIC BYPASS!!!! I have as much sympathy for this guy as I do for smokers dying of cancer. IE zero, and I had 2 grandparents die to cancer.
From what I have read in this thread and linked articles, this man is nothing but a drain on society. He creates nothing, he enriches nobody's life except MAYBE the folks paid to care for him. I don't view him as having earned the lavish medical care that the government of your country is vomiting all over him. FFS the guy wouldn't be this fat if it weren't for the damn governmental checks, caregivers, etc that have shoveled the population of several african villages into this bulwhemoth's drooling maw.
Da Boss wrote:Well, okay, I'm not down with the technical lingo. But it still stands as a point that there is a treatment for this sort of thing that isn't "go cycle your bike more" which involves seeing the right specialist.
If we put it another way, if you injured yourself playing contact sports, and went to the doctor about it, and he said "Take it easy on that leg" and you tried your best to do so, but ended up with soft tissue damage because what you REALLY needed was to be refered to a sports injury physiotherapist, you'd be pretty damn pissed off- I mean, you pay your taxes into the NHS like anybody, amirite? Even welfare recipients pay VAT.
I bet there'd be more sympathy for what is, in essence, a self inflicted injury, because you're not a repulsive tub of goddamned lard. Should we stop treating people who cause injury to themselves through risky hobbies? What do the sportsmen of dakka think?
Please go back and read my comment. Essentially I said that its fine to tell fattie to ride a bike. Give him a real dietician, get the guy some counseling for his behavioral concerns, and if he continues to eat 5 rashers of bacon every morning, cut him off.
HE GOT FAT AFTER GASTRIC BYPASS!!!! I have as much sympathy for this guy as I do for smokers dying of cancer. IE zero, and I had 2 grandparents die to cancer.
From what I have read in this thread and linked articles, this man is nothing but a drain on society. He creates nothing, he enriches nobody's life except MAYBE the folks paid to care for him. I don't view him as having earned the lavish medical care that the government of your country is vomiting all over him. FFS the guy wouldn't be this fat if it weren't for the damn governmental checks, caregivers, etc that have shoveled the population of several african villages into this bulwhemoth's drooling maw.
I get it, but it doesn't matter whether or not you have sympathy for someone. It's totally irrelevant, and it's the single best thing about a National Health Service- everyone gets helped, regardless of social stigma or public opinion on their condtion. I don't think this guy should sue the NHS, but at the same time, I think the NHS screwed up in how they handled this, or at least, some people employed by the NHS screwed up. Society is full of feth ups, helping them get better is worth doing, whether we think they are repulsive or not.
I don't have huge amounts of sympathy for this guy, but I still think the NHS should help people, even if they cause self inflicted injuries.
In short- guy is a gobshite, NHS shoulda done a better job of helping him regardless, he still shouldn't sue 'em.
Orlanth wrote:The outrage over the lawsuit has overshadowed that fact that he did have a valid point:
The former postman, who consumed 20,000 calories a day, eight times as much as the average man, said he sought help from his GP after ballooning to 30 stone.
But instead of receiving help to manage his weight, he said he was told in 1996 to: 'Ride your bike more'.
He went to the NHS for help and was told to exercise more. That like telling an alcoholic to stop drinking or a gambling addict to stop gambling, ultimately its what they need to do, but more help is needed.
People who are obese arre entitled to help in terms of diet pills and other aids that can help them. I was under the body mass index to qualify (18 stone and heavy built) and so could not get this support, this guy very clearly qualified at 30 stone. Fatties and people who are potential fatties need more than just a diet, they need real help. Once the pounds are on getting them off is hard and without results its all too easy to give up. Support was required, at the time he wasn't given much of any.
That much is fair, beyond that he is on his own.
Let him sue, as far as we are aware no-one force fed him and he was obviously aware of the consequences of overeating as the symptoms do not appear overnight. Let him have his day in court, lose and become an object lesson.
My only concern is if he is getting legal aid to do this. Maybe he is, maybe he isnt, people who have clear need of a state lawyer often can't get one, people with a dogma drum to beat are high on the queue to do, free of charge. Fatties are not generally seen as a disadvantaged minority, and he isn't ethnic so its quite possible he will have to fund himself. On the other hand he might be able to play the disabled card to drag this out at taxpayers expense.
This is the most sense on this thread!
I wonder if he's suing in a cry for help. If he has a disorder then he should have gotten help.
Additionally people's genetics and metabolism are totally different so we should not judge people. He needs help, he tried to get it and was fobbed off. It's not totally his fault but then again he bears some responsibility for eating 20,000 calories per day. (logistically how did he get the food?)
I don't know, whatever happened to taking responsibility for one's own actions instead of trying to blame addiction/internet/society for one's ills? I mean I am sure gamblers, druggies, alcoholics and the morbidly obese could point to some pseudo disorder bs to pin their troubles on but whatever happened to self-analysis and saying 'I have a problem here, lets sort it out?'
This guy didn't balloon to 70 stone overnight, surely at some point he must have thought he was getting a touch heavy?
Personally, the day I can't see my own genitals is probably the warning sign.
Yes, that's all well and good, but if you tell mentally ill people to just "get over it" it doesn't work very well.
I know it's fashionable (and has been practically forever) to give out about "bs disorders", but as I said, it's as self inflicted as drink related injuries, sports injuries and so on.
If we want to abandon the mentally ill, fine, but it's not going to be a very nice society to live in.
The truth is more complicated than black and white moral judgements.
There is such a thing as being addicted to food. The feeling of a full stomach is very healing and soothing to some and becomes a full time obsession. WHy do you think babies sleep after a full meal?
Yea but I know ALOT of fat people, hell Im a fat fella myself. I can tell you not 1 of them suffer from a disorder or mental condition. Its simply, I like to eat food. And yes I knew a woman personally that was easily 500pounds or more and she was mentally fit as a fiddle, she just didnt want to stop herself. That was my problem for a long ass time, I just wanted to eat thats all.
The dude was given a second chance (bypass surgery) and totally screwed it up by gaining a bunch of weight again. Sorry, but Im with Peter on this one, cut the dude off and let him float alone on it
I'm not denying the addiction nor am I advocating that such people get told to bugger off by the NHS. All I am saying is it is infuriating to see how these stories crop up in the papers and it seems no-one wants to accept that there is just as much onus on the patient to want to get better and help themselves as there is on the NHS to 'cure' people.
As I said, it seems to me it is all too easy for these people to decry everything else rather than take some responsibility for their own actions.
This guy made a willful act to shove 20k calories into his face. There is no withdrawal from overeating that drives you to seek more food lest you go into DT's, crap yourself, or deplete a neurotransmitter so much that you become clinically insane.
Fattie ate himself into a corner (literally) and is now trying to blame the system that told him a great way to get in shape. Give him disability insurance, and let him live on the same allowance that every other citizen deals with if they are crippled. I'm literally shocked that people think he should be given free care for a condition he himself choose to undertake. Nobody FORCED him to get gastric bypass, nobody FORCED him to eat bacon dipped in butter wrapped in crisco X eleventybillion and gain the weight BACK after that.
This is so far from the realm of socially responsible behavior that I'd honestly like to put a bullet in the guy's temple myself just to save your country the BS. Cost to society of this guy's behavior is absolutely unacceptable.
KingCracker wrote:Yea but I know ALOT of fat people, hell Im a fat fella myself. I can tell you not 1 of them suffer from a disorder or mental condition.
Well, that's the hard question. How do you know that absolutely none of them are addicted? The truth is you don't really know.
KingCracker wrote:Its simply, I like to eat food. And yes I knew a woman personally that was easily 500pounds or more and she was mentally fit as a fiddle, she just didnt want to stop herself. That was my problem for a long ass time, I just wanted to eat thats all.
Sure. And I agree that with most of us our unhealthy eating habits are just bad habits. But there is (at least theoretically) a dividing line between a bad habit and an incredibly self-destructive mental disorder.
KingCracker wrote:The dude was given a second chance (bypass surgery) and totally screwed it up by gaining a bunch of weight again. Sorry, but Im with Peter on this one, cut the dude off and let him float alone on it
These kind of extreme cases always test the boundaries of our tolerance and empathy. Maybe this guy has indeed crossed over the line and no longer worthy of human solace or care. But really, if we believe at all that eating can be an addiction (which at least some doctors seem to do), then the fact that this guy has taken it to such an absurd and self-destructive extreme actually, IMO, makes the idea that he's addicted more credible. Now, that's not to say that I think his lawsuit has merit. That's a separate issue.
As someone qualified to comment on this via my education and professional experience, I am absolutely denying the comparisson to process addiction to chemical dependency. They are not even in the same ball park. One entails long term development of impulse control as well as intense therapy over a long period of time, the other can be treated in the acute stage by low intensity medical supervision and basic counseling.
These comments apply to the following eating disorders, not "OMG I shove 20k calories in my face PAY FOR ME TO LIVE NOW"
Peter, I agree with you. It's not socially responsible, it's depressing. And Filbert, I agree with you, he is pathetic, and he is engaging in the blame game, and that is disgusting. I absolutely do not think he should be successful in suing the NHS, and I think the NHS spent too much money on him and his care to much too little effect.
Where I don't agree is that we can just say "feth you, it's your own fault, so go die!" Or "Man, he should just stop eating so much and cycle his bike more, or go die!" Maybe I'm unfashionably compassionate, but I feel sorry for people with mental illnesses, even not-very-dramatic ones like eating disorders. I think they need to be looked after so that it doesn't spiral, as it has in this case, and separated from enablers (the carer who was feeding him had to be an enabler). If you do not accept that he was mentally ill, fine, whatever, I don't agree with you. If you do accept it, and still think he deserves to be shot just for getting fat, then I would question your judgement.
Edit: In response to your latest post, I am fine with you disagreeing that it is an "addiction" in the physical sense, however, it is still a destructive behavioural disorder and should be treated as such. It's another form of crazy, and from my perspective, the crazies are to be helped.
Where I don't agree is that we can just say "feth you, it's your own fault, so go die!"
Or "Man, he should just stop eating so much and cycle his bike more, or go die!"
Granted. But there must be a cut-off point, no? Or otherwise do we keep funding his lifestyle and treatment for the rest of his life? How is this different to telling a terminal cancer patient they can't have x drug?
I do agree with you there, but it seems to me like his treatment wasn't handled very cost effectively anyway (going on the information I have).
Like, what was the carer doing feeding him so much? Why was that not questioned? Should the carer not have had to track what he was eating? Why did the doctor not refer to an appropriate counsellor? That sort of thing. Mental health provision is almost always underfunded by the public purse, because of the distaste and disgust engendered by those who suffer from it. So maybe there wasn't an available counsellor. But you've still gotta look at all sides of it. I've given up on people in my personal life with addictions who took the piss, so I guess I'm a hypocrite, but I was burned out with no more ability to help them. I'd hope that a national health service could provide more.
You can get mentally addicted to anything. I know people who can't wake up, eat breakfast, go to work, come home, or go to to sleep without pot, but they are some of the first people to tell you, "it's not addictive!"
What causes stuff like this, and that "baby" Jessica 300 lb 5-year-old, is control. Whether self- administered or parentally, where was the control? Do 5 year-olds feed themselves? If the parents are watching, they shouldn't! If the UK's fattest man was bed-ridden, how did he get food?
SoloFalcon1138 wrote:You can get mentally addicted to anything. I know people who can't wake up, eat breakfast, go to work, come home, or go to to sleep without pot, but they are some of the first people to tell you, "it's not addictive!"
Bud, trust me its not the same thing. There are complex chemical reactions in the brain that dictate the state of dependency we term as "addiction". Eating food doesn't cause these reactions in the same degree of intensity, nor in all of the same receptor sites.
Process addiction is not the same as chemical dependency. Habitual behavior patterns can be self reinforcing (herpa derp derp), but they don't have the external pressure of withdrawal as the fundamental underpinning.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wolfun wrote:Did the NHS put a burger in his hand?
No.
Then stop getting bacon grease on the lawsuit!
+1
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote:
it is still a destructive behavioural disorder and should be treated as such. It's another form of crazy, and from my perspective, the crazies are to be helped.
I totally agree. In this case the most helpful thing that can be done is to make his stupid face stop getting stuffed full of crap that makes him fatter.
Peter Wiggin wrote:Also, there is absolutely no mention of "food addiction" anywhere in addiction medicine. Fish Filet =/= light bulb full of meth.
With respect there are people who are addicted to food. Quoting your experience and education as proof of there being no thing doesn't mean there isn't. And, with respect, you need to do some more studying.
How do I know? Saw a patient about 6 months ago who was on mirtazapine and a side effect is increased appetite. He described it as being hungry 24/7 and a consequence he put weight on. 9 months later he was weaned off mirtazapine and then tried to lose the weight but was still eating. He was re-referred to the CPN's in order to address his eating disorder.
Complusive overeating, also known as food addiction, characterised with an obsessive or compulsive relationship to food, does exist and I am slightly disturbed that you advertise yourself as being in the know but miss this. A simple google reveals all you need to know even from from official health sources.
Peter Wiggin wrote:Also, there is absolutely no mention of "food addiction" anywhere in addiction medicine. Fish Filet =/= light bulb full of meth.
With respect there are people who are addicted to food. Quoting your experience and education as proof of there being no thing doesn't mean there isn't. And, with respect, you need to do some more studying.
How do I know? Saw a patient about 6 months ago who was on mirtazapine and a side effect is increased appetite. He described it as being hungry 24/7 and a consequence he put weight on. 9 months later he was weaned off mirtazapine and then tried to lose the weight but was still eating. He was re-referred to the CPN's in order to address his eating disorder.
Complusive overeating, also known as food addiction, characterised with an obsessive or compulsive relationship to food, does exist and I am slightly disturbed that you advertise yourself as being in the know but miss this. A simple google reveals all you need to know even from from official health sources.
With respect to your lack of respect, you clearly have absolutely no background in regards to behavioral pharmacology or the neurological process that is "addiction". Like I said, habitual behavior is not addiction no matter how many times you throw the word at it. Would you like me to elaborate for you?
Peter Wiggin wrote:Also, there is absolutely no mention of "food addiction" anywhere in addiction medicine. Fish Filet =/= light bulb full of meth.
With respect there are people who are addicted to food. Quoting your experience and education as proof of there being no thing doesn't mean there isn't. And, with respect, you need to do some more studying.
How do I know? Saw a patient about 6 months ago who was on mirtazapine and a side effect is increased appetite. He described it as being hungry 24/7 and a consequence he put weight on. 9 months later he was weaned off mirtazapine and then tried to lose the weight but was still eating. He was re-referred to the CPN's in order to address his eating disorder.
Complusive overeating, also known as food addiction, characterised with an obsessive or compulsive relationship to food, does exist and I am slightly disturbed that you advertise yourself as being in the know but miss this. A simple google reveals all you need to know even from from official health sources.
With respect to your lack of respect, you clearly have absolutely no background in regards to behavioral pharmacology or the neurological process that is "addiction". Like I said, habitual behavior is not addiction no matter how many times you throw the word at it. Would you like me to elaborate for you?
Let me sum up:
People can get addicted to stuff, like food, pot, or junk. If people let it get out of hand, they are guilty, not the system, or the fast food companies, or aliens for that matter. Come to terms with your own responsibilities!
As someone who likes to keep myself in shape, I have to say, I have no understanding of how someone can let themselves get into that shape.
But even more so, I don't understand this... unless this man's physiology violates the laws of thermodynamics, then his carers have been having to PLACE INTO HIS HANDS enough food to keep him at that size... Even a body at rest will burn calories. All it takes is to feed him slightly below maintenance for his size and he'll drop the pounds....
So some mind-shatteringly incompetent carer is WILLINGLY handing him the thousands upon thousands of calories that he needs to stay at that weight... Why? Why do they not refuse and simply give him little enough that he loses weight? Why? I cannot, for the life of me, understand...
As for his suing of the NHS. No, just no. If it's not laughed out of court then I'll eat my hat.
He ate that much, he even got the help of reputable surgeons and other doctors, but because he didn't get the right kind of help, according to him, he deserves to sue? B.S.
Peter Wiggin wrote:With respect to your lack of respect, you clearly have absolutely no background in regards to behavioral pharmacology or the neurological process that is "addiction". Like I said, habitual behavior is not addiction no matter how many times you throw the word at it. Would you like me to elaborate for you?
You have a terrible attitude. How about you get off the ridiculous pedestal you have put yourself on and read? I didn't say habitual.
Just because YOU don't know about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It is quite arrogant to reply in the disgusting dismissive manner in which you did.
Peter Wiggin wrote: Like I said, habitual behavior is not addiction no matter how many times you throw the word at it. Would you like me to elaborate for you?
No one is questioning that. What people are questioning is what can be considered to be addiction or, more broadly, psychological disorder (because, despite what you say, complsive eating is often categorized with things like anorexia), and what can be considered merely habitual.
This isn't just a matter of debate here either. You're happily quoting facts regarding your training in addition medicine, but the truth is that there is no real consensus in the medical community. As with all things connected to the brain, the division between addiction and habituation remain heavily contested to this day.
SoloFalcon1138 wrote:You can get mentally addicted to anything. I know people who can't wake up, eat breakfast, go to work, come home, or go to to sleep without pot, but they are some of the first people to tell you, "it's not addictive!"
You can get 'addicted' to gaming in some form or other.
SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
What causes stuff like this, and that "baby" Jessica 300 lb 5-year-old, is control. Whether self- administered or parentally, where was the control? Do 5 year-olds feed themselves? If the parents are watching, they shouldn't! If the UK's fattest man was bed-ridden, how did he get food?
QFT. That video made me angry. Its not a heart wrenching medical tragedy involving a child, it's a case of child abuse for social workers to investigate. The parents/carers need locking up, and I do mean that literally. No matter the disorder, and she may have a fair few, you cannot put on the pounds if the stodge isn't there. And no its not 'love' to over-indulge, not to that extent.
I met a real fattie, he is very round and 26 stone. That to me is a fattie. He puffs and pants and has problems with stairs, he goes out for four kebabs and two trifles and comes home eats them and feels hungry about two hours later. He is about as fat as he can go and it will kill him fairly soon unless he is careful. I only met him socially the rest of the info I got from his flatmate.
I call him a 'real fattie' because he goes out and gets his own two trifles and four kebabs. However once you are so fat you cant do that, once you cross the 30 stone barrier and cant leave the flat easily, and especially when you exheed 40 stone and cant move, then you are increasingly clearly an abuse victim.
20,000 calories a day. I dont have a car and if I went out and got hold of 60k calories, a standard three days supply, I would have problems getting it home unless they were all Mars bars or something.... Stopping for a maths break.....
Mars bars weigh in at 260calories each, though they are quite small now. That means 231 Mars bars for three days supply. At 58g each, thats still over thirteen kilos
.....ok scratch that. I would still have a problem. I am not going to work it out if the groceries included chips or other 'healthier' stuff. There is no car that he can drive; so if his phone is disabled so he cannot order online, and his carer/wife flatly refused to give him more than 2k calories with five fruit and veggie choices, what could her do about it? Eat the chair?
Seriously we are looking at the wrong source of the problem when weight gets that bad. Allow me to look at a similar problem.
I knew this girl, a nice girl well brought up and a real looker too, but who was cursed with the drink. In order to have an alcoholic in my life I had to have NO booze in the house. This is easy for me because alcohol has no hold on me. I can make a bottle of sherry last for years, and I keep some good wine for a meal, I could forfeit both of those without any real loss. I was ok with that. Likewise someone with Mr Mason in the house would have to keep an empty fridge, or one part filled with healthfoods.
Peter Wiggin wrote:"Behavioral addiction" isn't really accepted as a diagnosis these days. Its been proposed for the DSM-V, but currently things like this are viewed as one of a few things.
1. Genetic disorder, yes some folks have jacked up glands and require medical help.
2. Symptomatic behavior brought on by another diagnosis (IE Somatoform or Anxiety disorders most likely)
3. Impulse control disorders
4. Possible EDNOS 307.50....IE Eating disorder not otherwise specified
I'd hazard to say that this guy falls into the impulse control disorder spectrum, which would require a clinical treatment regimen incorporating counseling for the behavioral aspect, and DIET WITH EXERCISE for the physical portion.
Gastric bypass is an abomination in my eyes. Right up there with the Vomitoriums of ancient Rome.
Richr Romans had a room in where a slave would help you vomit up the banquet you just ate so that you could return to dine or go to the next banquet.
While a food resource waste it kept obesity in check and was part of the daily life of those who owned enough to be above subsistence living. In some respects the Romans got it right, at the very least I don't see why Peter Wiggin finds it an abomination. Its a bit late to get bleeding heart about children going hungry below the forum steps and as far as the excesses of wealth go, eating enough for three or four people is a burden society can afford. especially compared to the utter waste that surrounds our supermarket society and global food logistics.
Puking your meal up is five minutes of misery, for that you can return to your couch and enjoy an hour of good wine cheer and feasting. Romans partied hard but put more practical thought into it than perhaps we do.
Oh, that's GENIUS! And then, when all the folks on welfare can't find work, begin to starve, and then are forced to beg, steal, attack others, or die in the streets, we'll be SORTED!
Da Boss wrote:Oh, that's GENIUS! And then, when all the folks on welfare can't find work, begin to starve, and then are forced to beg, steal, attack others, or die in the streets, we'll be SORTED!
I'm glad we agree, although I never thought of myself a genius. I hope he wins his case, he's well within his rights to sue the Government. It was the Government who provided the funds to enable him to feed himself to oblivion. If the Government hadn't given him a free life on benefits, he couldn't have done this to himself.
him!"
what the hell was he eating?
. He weighs 1/2 ton 
.
