Study reveals fat people have 13x number of lost work days, cost employers more than normal people

[Vonkhan]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: JEDI
Give them the chair. Fry tham all!

oh, they wont fit in the chair? Gas Chamber...

Fatty Fatty 2x4, couldn't fit through the Chamber Door....?

cant hang 'em either, rope wud break


I KEEEEED I KEEEEEED I used to be a fat lil kid

 

[Uppsala9496]

Originally posted by: beer


Again, how is discrimination against fat people illegal? Time and time again, studies have shown that fat people are less reliable, less respected, and now, far more likely to cost employers more, both in downttime and in increased health care costs.

Are ultimatiums required to solve this? Why should an employer hire someone who is fat and going to cost them more than someone who is normal?

I'm not hating on obesity here, but it is disgusting and coutnerproductive and I hate the fact that my health care costs subsidizing your lifestyle. Since you're costing me money, I want answers.

Any discrimination in the workplace is illegal.

What about this example:
60 year old female with breast cancer and rheumatoid arthritis. As a result of the breast cancer treatment, the individual is now classified as obese (taking the experimental drug herceptin). As a result of the treatment, this individual also has severe arthritic inflamations that last a day or two after the breast cancer treatment.

The employer now decides to discriminate against this person under the pretense that they are obese.

The individual will claim discrimination based on a myriad of reasons including age, gender, ADA, etc.

Studies like this are too generic in scope to come up with a definative "fat people can be dicriminated against" statement. Any company that discriminates against someone because they are fat is going to face numerous lawsuits.

People can become fat for more reasons than just being lazy.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Flyback

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Fatasses should also pay higher insurance premiums. They cost our health system at least as much as smokers do.

As should little anemic and underweight twits who don't eat properly.

If you can find a peer reviewed study that backs up your assertions, have at it.

I'm trying to hit the right phrases on google...but I do know that there are a number of studies out that have shown that being underweight has some serious risks associated with it.

These include low bone density, decreased immune response, deterioration of muscles and tissues(and more prone to injury), poor skin conditions, and high risk of miscarriages.

These aren't things that typically affect people that are overweight. Note that we are clearly defining the terms underweight and overweight. This is not about the "normal" and "obese" weight groups.

 

[skace]

Consider it motivation....

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Flyback

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Fatasses should also pay higher insurance premiums. They cost our health system at least as much as smokers do.

As should little anemic and underweight twits who don't eat properly.

If you can find a peer reviewed study that backs up your assertions, have at it.

I'm trying to hit the right phrases on google...but I do know that there are a number of studies out that have shown that being underweight has some serious risks associated with it.

These include low bone density, decreased immune response, deterioration of muscles and tissues(and more prone to injury), poor skin conditions, and high risk of miscarriages.

These aren't things that typically affect people that are overweight. Note that we are clearly defining the terms underweight and overweight. This is not about the "normal" and "obese" weight groups.

I don't doubt that one bit. But how many people are dangerously underweight and how many are dangerously overweight? I'm willing to bet the latter has far better representation in the US today.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Flyback

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Fatasses should also pay higher insurance premiums. They cost our health system at least as much as smokers do.

As should little anemic and underweight twits who don't eat properly.

If you can find a peer reviewed study that backs up your assertions, have at it.

I'm trying to hit the right phrases on google...but I do know that there are a number of studies out that have shown that being underweight has some serious risks associated with it.

These include low bone density, decreased immune response, deterioration of muscles and tissues(and more prone to injury), poor skin conditions, and high risk of miscarriages.

These aren't things that typically affect people that are overweight. Note that we are clearly defining the terms underweight and overweight. This is not about the "normal" and "obese" weight groups.

I don't doubt that one bit. But how many people are dangerously underweight and how many are dangerously overweight? I'm willing to bet the latter has far better representation in the US today.

I think latest stats are 2 out of 3 are overweight, 1 out of 3 are obese. That other 1/3 includes "normal" and the underweights.

So to answer your question, a fraction are in the "dangerously underweight" category.

 

[Vic]

Are get-fit-or-else ultimatiums what it is going to take to get people to get off their asses?

What ultimatum do you think will possibly work against a person with so little respect for their own body?

See... it's just like the smoking thing. First, we pretend it's for their own good. Then, we rationalize how it's for our own good. Next, the fearmongering and the pogroms. It's always the same.

Why don't you just come to terms with yourself? Smokers and fat people remind you of mortality and that scares you. So you want the reminder to be punished/removed/etc.

 

[child of wonder]

More companies should consider building in house work out rooms, basketball courts, etc. to promote exercise. If that's not possible, offer to help pay for a gym membership (like $20/month or something).

 

[zephyrprime]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Fatasses should also pay higher insurance premiums. They cost our health system at least as much as smokers do.

Smokers actually cost the system less money overall if you include stuff like social security. They die off sooner so they can't collect as much SS and medicare+rx.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
I think latest stats are 2 out of 3 are overweight, 1 out of 3 are obese. That other 1/3 includes "normal" and the underweights.

So to answer your question, a fraction are in the "dangerously underweight" category.

In other news, 4 out of 3 Americans chew Trident.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
More companies should consider building in house work out rooms, basketball courts, etc. to promote exercise. If that's not possible, offer to help pay for a gym membership (like $20/month or something).

Why should fatasses be coddled? Smokers were simply told they couldn't smoke at work anymore. Did employers all supply nicotine patches and gum to smokers? No, and AFAIK it was only within the last few years that insurers started providing help to smokers who wanted to quit. Fattasses should be told to shape up or ship out, the exact same treatment that smokers got.

Don't like it? Too bad, people should have thought about that before deciding that treating people like crap because of their habits was OK. Now we're just going to go from one group to the next, demonizing anything that offends the sensibilities of thin-skinned wankers.

 

[icelazer]

Not to get off topic or anything (Hah!) but I wonder if anyone has ever made the correlation that due to the type of jobs that the US is focued on (service-oriented/technology/etc) combined with the fact that US workers spend more hours at work on average than a majority of other countries, that some aspect of life (in this case health and fitness) has to suffer. There are only so many hours in a week, between longer work hours and less vacation time, it seems that both health and sleep have been slipping as priorities.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
I've worked with obese people who, when driven by some purpose, could get more done and move faster than any skinny person you ever met. Lazy people come in all shapes and sizes...so do motivated people. I call shens on the whole concept of obese= lazy.

It's not so much that "obese=lazy" so much as "laziness leads to obesity".

 

[BigPoppa]

I'm overweight. I haven't missed a day of work in over a year. If I do miss a day, its very typically completely out of my control. I haven't called in sick to work in...over 5 years. I have yet to have an injury related to my weight. But feel free to punish me for issues that other overweight people have. I'm sure all of you pushing for this have called in sick and missed work much more often than me. At least make the system fair to all.

 

[Uppsala9496]

Laziness/obesity.......you still can't discriminate against people in the workplace based on their physical size.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
More companies should consider building in house work out rooms, basketball courts, etc. to promote exercise. If that's not possible, offer to help pay for a gym membership (like $20/month or something).

What good would that do? It's a known fact in the fitness industry that most people with gym memberships NEVER GO. Hell, that's where they make their profits. People like me, who go 3-5 times a week, are their money-losers.

 

[Kelemvor]

I'm sure some healthcare insurance place will come up with staggered rates based on weight range and smoking habits and such. They do it for life insurance, why not for health insurance. After all, the fat people and smokers make healthcare costs go up for everyone yet they don't pay any more for it

 

[Kelemvor]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: child of wonder
More companies should consider building in house work out rooms, basketball courts, etc. to promote exercise. If that's not possible, offer to help pay for a gym membership (like $20/month or something).

What good would that do? It's a known fact in the fitness industry that most people with gym memberships NEVER GO. Hell, that's where they make their profits. People like me, who go 3-5 times a week, are their money-losers.

People don't go because they have to GO somewhere. If there was a gym right at your place of employment, you could work out at lunch or right after work and not have extra time to drive to a gym and things like that. I'd love that.

For me it's 15 minutes to the gym, 15 minutes back. 5-10 for the whole time. That's a lot of wasted time. If I could work out right at work, it's 0 travel time and probably less locker room time because it'd be not very crowded. Definitely a time saver.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Hold on a sec while I wheel my chair over to the fridge for another coke and a pack of ding dongs.

 

[Flyback]

If you're going to discriminate, why stop with things that people can control? Why does that matter? I'd support discrimination towards obese people if we could do it for everyone.

If your family has a history of cancer, diabetes or heart disease, then why can't employers selectively hire and fire you based on that criteria? The end result is the same: you cost an organization more money with your sick leave.

Who really cares if you had choice in it or not, that is no excuse and we shouldn't coddle people who make the species weaker. Life ain't fair and you got a crappy hand of cards. So what.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Kelemvor

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: child of wonder
More companies should consider building in house work out rooms, basketball courts, etc. to promote exercise. If that's not possible, offer to help pay for a gym membership (like $20/month or something).

What good would that do? It's a known fact in the fitness industry that most people with gym memberships NEVER GO. Hell, that's where they make their profits. People like me, who go 3-5 times a week, are their money-losers.

People don't go because they have to GO somewhere. If there was a gym right at your place of employment, you could work out at lunch or right after work and not have extra time to drive to a gym and things like that. I'd love that.

For me it's 15 minutes to the gym, 15 minutes back. 5-10 for the whole time. That's a lot of wasted time. If I could work out right at work, it's 0 travel time and probably less locker room time because it'd be not very crowded. Definitely a time saver.

Huh? That's not the case at all. You put a treadmill in most people's homes and they still wouldn't use it. That's a proven fact.

And 15 minutes is "a lot of wasted time?" What would have been doing otherwise? Watching TV? Texting your friends? Posting on the forums? Fapping? God forbid we cut into those valuable uses of time!

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: child of wonder
More companies should consider building in house work out rooms, basketball courts, etc. to promote exercise. If that's not possible, offer to help pay for a gym membership (like $20/month or something).

What good would that do? It's a known fact in the fitness industry that most people with gym memberships NEVER GO. Hell, that's where they make their profits. People like me, who go 3-5 times a week, are their money-losers.

That's why I like the deal set up with my employer. We get tiered rates based on how frequently you go. Full price for membership is $60 a month (full olympic pool, 1/4 track, 1/8 resistance based lap pool, basketball courts, workout classes included, free weights, cardio, ect). If you go 8 times or more a month it drops down to $40. It's automatically deducted from your payroll too.

Of course, nothing is stopping you from going there, scanning in, and then leaving...

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Flyback
If you're going to discriminate, why stop with things that people can control? Why does that matter? I'd support discrimination towards obese people if we could do it for everyone.

If your family has a history of cancer, diabetes or heart disease, then why can't employers selectively hire and fire you based on that criteria? The end result is the same: you cost an organization more money with your sick leave.

Who really cares if you had choice in it or not, that is no excuse and we shouldn't coddle people who make the species weaker. Life ain't fair and you got a crappy hand of cards. So what.

I agree, giving jobs to anyone with poor genes only encourages them to survive long enough to breed. I don't care if it's a prediliction to obesity, smoking, diabetes, heart disease, cancer etc. If it's going to cost my Adonis looking self money, they can go.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Fatasses should also pay higher insurance premiums. They cost our health system at least as much as smokers do.

That already happens when it comes to private insurance. Infact after a certain weight, you are unable to get private insurance.

 

[Fritzo]

The OP can get off his high horse. Not everyone is overweight by choice. A lot of people are overweight due to some medical or mental condition.

My wife for example, is quite large. However, she's had 4 of her lumbar vertebrae fused to a severe back injury. She can not stand or walk for more than 20-30 minutes without severe pain, and she has a hard time doing any kind of strenuous exercise. A dietitian calculated she would have to be on a 900 calorie/day diet to loose weight with her current mobility capability, so her only alternative is gastric bypass (which our insurance won't cover and we don't have $20000 to spare).