Japan Imposes "Fine On Fat"

An anonymous reader writes "A recently-introduced law in Japan requires all businesses to have mandatory obesity checks (video link) for all their employees and employees' family members over the age of 40, CNN reports. If the employee or family member is deemed obese, and does not lose the extra fat soon, their employer faces large fines. The legislated upper limit for the waistline is 33.5" for men, and 35.5" for women. Should America adopt universal health insurance, could we live to see the same kind of individual health regulations imposed on us by the government? By comparison, the average waistline in America in 2005 was 39 inches for men, 37 inches for women."

Comments

frosty piss.

[Anonymous Coward]

if it gets rid of that fat fuck CowboyNeal, I'm all for it.

Re:frosty piss.

[Theoboley]

I'm banking on not... Who wants to see 150 Lb sumo wrestlers throw each other around... Oh wait, thats called the UFC.

already here

[Romancer]

Do you smoke?
Do you drink?
Drug tests?

Any of this sound familiar in a survey from your insurance application or work orientation pack?

Re:already here

[daveatneowindotnet]

Agreed, to be honest this is just bad marketing by the Japanese government. They are being too honest. If they merely raised everyone's taxes and then offered tax relief to those who stayed below these requirements they would be seen as "helping" their citizens stay healthy. Side note, the article is being just rabble-rousing by comparing waistlines considering that Americans are so much taller on average than Japanese it makes sense that they would be proportionally larger in waist size.

Someone has been reading F.Paul Wilson

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

http://billstclair.com/DoingFreedom/000623/df.0600.fa.lipidleggin.html Written in 1978...scary and well worth reading (it's a short story, won't take long to read)

Stupid

[SatanicPuppy]

Well wow, that's just dumb. Didn't they read that smokers and fat people cost the government less thank skinny people?. The study was done by the Dutch, and their healthcare is mandatory private (like people are talking about for the US) supplemented by socialized healthcare for people who are elderly or unable to otherwise function, so I'd think they'd have a pretty good idea of what the costs are.
_
Sure, the smokers and fat people have more health problems, but they have the decency to drop dead and not linger on the government dime, senile and incontinent, for a few extra decades.
_
I try to keep healthy, but when I hit the point where I'm not enjoying life much any more, I'm eating whatever the hell I want, taking up heroin. I'll be mainlining viagra II, and having sex with the kind of scary women that'd have sex with me! You see these articles coming out of Florida about old guys getting arrested for trying to buy drugs, just for the hell of it, and I don't understand what the problem is. This society is so fricking weird; god forbid you threaten your own ability to live to 110.
_
Life is one of those things where it's really about quality, not quantity. //Sorry about the stupid dashes. Goddamn system isn't taking my paragraph breaks.

Minimum Female Bust Line

[chill]

So, when do they extend this to a minimum female bust line?

If you don't have at least a 34C, your employer provided insurance will mandate a boob job.

I'm thinking the gov't inspector position on that law will be a highly coveted spot.

Re:wow.. seriously?

[SatanicPuppy]

Well, too much in this country is made about BMI. If you're 6 feet tall and weigh 200 pounds you can be a chubby guy or a really fit guy or somewhere in between, but regardless the government classifies you as "overweight". You need to set a standard for health that doesn't deal with weird metrics like "waist size" or "body mass index".

actually

[Reality Master 201]

Are all people in Japan the same height?

Yes they are. Deviants are stretched or squashed as needed, and beaten for their insolence.

Your fat costs me money

[Brain-Fu]

Even with private health insurance, those who live unhealthy lifestyles have the net effect of increasing insurance premiums for everyone.

The insurance companies maintain profitability by selecting price points that set them ahead, given all of the expenses they are likely to incur. The more fat people they have on their plans, the more likely they are to spend money on all the fat-related medical issues that arise, so the more they must charge.

While it may be unfair to target fat people (or smokers or drinkers or what-have-you), isn't it equally unfair to make healthy people pay a lot of extra money to support the unhealthy lifestyles of their neighbors?

As usual, this door swings both ways, and it doesn't matter whether the health care is universal or privatized...any kind of medical insurance raises these issues.

Re:Your fat costs me money

[daveatneowindotnet]

I find your lack of, lack of, faith disturbing. Insurance companies are thieves, they are the one business who's business model relies on not providing the service they promise. Case in point, Insurance Company A takes a beating in the stock market, to raise profits they raise rates on doctors malpractice insurance, then claim that it is because of lawsuits, for you know, malpractice. Insurance Company B is operating beyond their current means, instead of ceasing purchase of mahogany office furniture, use faulty statistics to target people with higher disposable incomes for auto insurance rate increases, (males around 22-28). I'm not saying government control would be better or that it is unfair for people to pay for an other's lifestyle. But if the problem is price of insurance, lets start by being honest why it is so high.

Re:Your fat costs me money

[ShieldW0lf]

That's one of those things they use to justify sin taxes. It's not true. People with unhealthy lifestyles die more rapidly than people with unhealthy lifestyles. Which means they cost much, much less. The people who lingers in the system for many years are the ones who drive up costs.

Re:One does not follow the other...

[Free the Cowards]

That's what happens when you buy "insurance" to cover every little thing.

Insurance should cover catastrophic, unforseeable events. You buy car insurance so that you have coverage if you get t-boned by a semi. You don't buy insurance to cover your oil changes. It would be absurd, and if everybody bought oil-change insurance it would drive the cost through the roof. Yet this is what everybody expects from health "insurance", and guess what happened, the costs got driven through the roof.

Athletes???

[mini_razor]

Surely that counts out virtually most athletes in sports such as Weightlifting, Rugby Union, Shotput, Discus and many many more sports in which the atheletes are likely to be semi pro and have to have a 9 - 5 to help support themselves financially. Let alone Sumo Wrestling which is what football is to us Brits! Thats real football by the way to all you yanks :-p. You can be very healthy and very muscular and have a waist well above 33.5, I know a guy whose a semi professional Rugby Union player who has a 42 inch waist and a 55 inch chest, and is fitter than 99% of people on the street! It should be done on proper BMI (Body Mass Index), not including just height and weight as most do, but a real BMI includes skin fold measurements and takes into account percentage body fat and needs to be carried out by a qualified professional for the results to be accurate. If your gonna introduce a law which has monetary fines attatched to it at least make it fair!

Re:Junk food tax? That's a GREAT idea.

[InvisblePinkUnicorn]

"We don't know how much it would, but studies from cigarette taxes show that increases costs decrease consumption of even highly desirable things."

So fewer and fewer people are getting what they desire, because other anonymous people don't desire it and would like to force them into a position where they can't afford their desires! What an idiotic and indefensible notion.

"Obesity increases fuel consumption -- the obese eat more (more food transport and production fuel use) and weigh more (more transport costs in themselves)."

If they can afford the food, who's to tell them they should be allowed to eat it. What happened to "life, liberty, pursuit of happiness"?

"And yes, their health care costs us -- we should be getting some of that back."

Only if you choose to be part of the system. The difference between that and a publicly-funded system is that you have no choice.

"A small tax..."

It is not the size that matters. Forcibly taking away someone's productivity (in the form of money) is no different from theft.

And your bad genetics cost ME...

[tjstork]

While it may be unfair to target fat people (or smokers or drinkers or what-have-you), isn't it equally unfair to make healthy people pay a lot of extra money to support the unhealthy lifestyles of their neighbors?

So, what if I have good genes.... and you have bad? If we are willing to open up the can of worms of risk assignment, then why should we ignore science and not surcharge those people who have doomed genetics? What, exactly, entitles people with weaker genes to a health discount at the expense of someone else?

Re:And your bad genetics cost ME...

[blueg3]

And I say, "you don't seem to know much about biology". Your biggest error is claiming that you have muscle mass that is "all diet". More important, though, you don't seem to recognize the significance that metabolism -- including very significant genetic factors -- plays in the system.

By "thermodynamics" you probably mean "energy conservation". All mass and energy conservation tells you, on first glance, is that you can't possibly gain more weight than your total intake (minus your total excretion -- including respiration). Reducing your consumption reduces available energy -- your body can respond by reducing metabolism rather than consuming stored fat.

Re:And your bad genetics cost ME...

[TheSpengo]

Actually that's not entirely true. I worked at a grocery store as a teenager and one thing I noticed and found rather interesting was that overweight or otherwise unhealthy looking people usually bought the more expensive pre-made food while healthier people purchased instead a whole lot more of the items required to make their own food like flour and produce. Granted, most of the extra healthy food such as RBST-free meat, omega 3 eggs, whole grain breads, etc. tend to be somewhat more expensive, you can usually save on these too by attending your local farmer's market.

Re:And your bad genetics cost ME...

[Tyr_7BE]

I seem to feel the need to post a counterpoint to just about everything you said, because I've noticed the complete opposite of your entire post. Think of this as an antipost to your post.

I did decrease my calorie consumption after university. Most of my diet consists of fresh vegetables, fruits, whole grains, beans, nuts, tofu, and low fat seafoods. I get most of my protein from non-animal sources, I avoid white/bleached grains, and eat primarily vegetables, in sensible portion sizes. I made this shift in my diet probably two years ago. While I haven't been getting bigger, or fatter, I have been hovering around a 38" waist. I'm not pear-shaped or round, but you definitely can't see my abs. In addition to diet, for the last two years or so I have been going to the gym 3 times per week, playing four hours of soccer per week, baseball twice per week, and biking everywhere (I don't have a car, so 100% of my transit is by bicycle). I consider my lifestyle apart from my computer desk job to be very healthy - I eat right and I exercise. But it's just not in my genes to have the six pack and lean body. My father is the same way - he works construction for a living, goes to the gym every single day and runs for 45 minutes, and while he's not fat by any stretch of the imagination, he's definitely not lean and skinny. At the same time, I know people who are beanstalk-thin and eat whatever they want. Entire pizzas to themselves, entire pots of pasta with cream sauce, basically throwing dietary caution to the wind. Your diet plays a role in your body shape, but genetics does as well. And that's where I see this proposed "fat tax" as really inappropriate. In order for me to get to a 33" waist, I would pretty much have to starve myself to dangerous levels. It simply wouldn't be a safe thing for me to do with my body type.

As for sugary foods appearing at the supermarkets, I have always seen sugary foods in the supermarkets. Pulp-free juice has been around as long as I can remember, and we were begging our mom for sugary cereals since we were old enough to walk and talk and eat cereal. What I have noticed lately is the growth of that remote corner of the grocery store dedicated to organic food and healthy eating. What once was two or three shelves hidden away at the back of the store has expanded to be a good 15% of the place. Whole grain pastas, natural peanut butters, wild/brown rice, etc etc. Not only that, but I've been seeing "certified organic" alternatives to just about every product on the shelf, even outside of the organic section. This includes produce and preserves. It seems people are honestly more interested in putting better things in their bodies these days, and grocery stores all over the region have changed to reflect this in the last five years or so. This could however just be a difference between where you and I live (I'm north of the border in Canada).

Re:And your bad genetics cost ME...

[akp]

You say "good genes". I say: "bad math". Body fat is subject to the universal laws of thermodynamics. If you decrease your calorie consumption, you will have less energy left over to store as fat. The overall trend in the USA (or probably all of the western world) is towards unhealthy diets. I have what might be called a "superfood" diet and hover at a trim 30-32" waist size, even with what I must admit is too little exercise.

 

Wow! Your anecdotally reported study with a sample size of one has convinced me! Diet must be the only factor in body fat composition!

Re:And your bad genetics cost ME...

[Amilianna]

So, I'm chiming in as someone who is technically obese. By those screwed up BMI charts, I am overweight (even though otherwise I am COMPLETELY healthy, excusing some childhood issues I had long before I became overweight). Points to make: 1) You think that buying healthy is cheaper than buying unhealthy? Just go into your meat department. Look at 1# of hamburger meat at 20% fat and one at 10% fat. Which one is more expensive? Then take that and compare it to a package of, say, stew meat. That right there tells you which is cheaper - healthy or unhealthy. 2) I am medically obese (but not grossly obese, or whatever the next step is) and yet none of my weight has come from poor eating choices, but from hormones. I gained 40 # from birth control, then stabilized. I gained approximately 35 # when I got pregnant with my first child. Then stabilized again. Now I have a second child and my weight has stabilized at 25# or so over what I was after my first. I have tried exercising, I kept a food journal (wherein I saw that I was eating not only healthy but my caloric intake was extremely low - I wasn't even getting the 2000 calories that most people are suppose to because I only eat when I'm hungry!). Should I be punished because I can't lose weight? Now, granted, I live in America and not Japan so this measure wouldn't affect me, but it just makes me think of the women over there who have had a couple children and who's bodies haven't ever given up the weight. Now, not only they but their entire family will be basically kicked out in the cold because they decided to have kids and the woman couldn't lose the hormone weight afterwards? That just seem cruel to me. And those BMIs don't take anything into account that I've ever seen. What about bone and muscle mass? Did you know that Michael Jordan is clinically obese according to the BMI? For women, what about our breast size? I once read that a D cup breast weighs 20# (so 40# for the set). That could send many people over into the "obese" category. And just as a note: Marilyn Monroe wore approximately a dress size 12 (by today's standards). Do you realize that that size is often put in the "plus" area in a lot of stores? With all these unhealthily thin (and YES there is a thing and YES many celebs and models fall into this category, imo) role models making average size women feel fat and doctors contributing to the problem by failing to take into account so many factors when they chart up your "weight and height" on that messed up BMI it's no wonder that so many of our girls are growing up with eating disorders and a warped view of themselves. I would rather, instead of people focusing on "obesity", that we focus on actual health. If you are an overall healthy person and taking care of yourself (ie eating well and getting exercise and such) that THAT should be the focus, rather than what shows up when you step on a scale. Sorry if that ended up a little ranty... guess I'm a bit sensitive about the whole thing. :blush:

Re:And your bad genetics cost ME...

[thegnu]

People who actually can't lose the weight are statistical outliers. I agree with you that these people will be punished by the Japanese system, but you can't say it's common, because it's not.

I know that hormonal issues can cause you to gain and retain weight, but I have a hard time believing someone when they tell me they can't lose the weight. I know it gets harder as you get older, and under differing circumstances, but here's what you do:

1. Exercise daily. At LEAST 15 minutes of moderate cardiovascular activity daily. If you're fit enough to do yoga, do the sun salutation (while focusing on proper breathing) 12 times in a row (or work up to that). That takes 15 minutes, and about 1 x 2 meters of floorspace. Also, a rowing machine or an elliptical crosstrainer is a good way to simulate running-style cardio without blowing your knees.

2. Shift your diet toward proteins. Shift simple carbs to complex carbs. Shift towards eating more insoluble fiber. If you're willing to pick up exercise, a generalized Zone-style diet of 40% calories from protein, 30% carbs and 30% fats will do wonders.

3. Build muscle. Muscle increases your metabolism, gives you energy, and makes you stronger so you can exert yourself more often without injuring yourself.

4. Eat 5 times a day. Eat right when you wake up, and space it evenly until 6pm or so (this is assuming a "normal" schedule). And don't eat for 3 hours before you go to sleep. So if you're eating 1500 calories, you get 300 calories/meal. You get stuff like 2 cans of tuna fish, a tablespoon of olive oil and 1 slice of whole grain bread. Eating that meal is goddamn rough when you're not hungry, let me tell you.

And then tell me you can't lose the weight. I lost 65 lbs (that's putting on maybe 10-20lbs muscle), and completely changed my metabolism from one where I couldn't lose weight to one where I could eat anything I wanted and not gain weight. Admittedly, I was young.

I don't want to sound like I'm on your case, because I realize you're sensitive about it. I just can't believe you, based on what I know. I also wanted to put this here as much for anybody who comes along and reads your post so there's decent information for them. And of course, I could be wrong about you. I've been wrong once before. :-)

Cheers,
Nathan

Re:And your bad genetics cost ME...

[MojoStan]

>> You'll also notice that trying to eat healthy (fresh food, etc) will push your food bill up sharply unless you are willing to eat nothing but oatmeal and beans. I call Whole Foods "Whole Paycheck".

.

> Oh, Whole Foods is steep, there is absolutely no question of that. It's not just that what you're buying is more expensive than regular stuff, it's also that you've gone to a rather expensive place to buy it...

.

Am I the only fool who shops at Whole Foods to save money? Sure, I don't buy expensive fresh produce there (which is generally higher-quality compared to your average supermarket), but their bulk food section (selection varies by location) and store brand products offer a lot of low-cost healthy food.

.

Bulk rolled oats are 69 cents per pound and cheaper than any packaged oats I've seen. 365 Organic whole wheat pasta is the cheapest I've tried that doesn't have the texture of cardboard. 18oz jars of 365 natural peanut butter for less than $2, 365 whole wheat flour, bulk beans, bulk cocoa powder, etc.

Re:One does not follow the other...

[InvisblePinkUnicorn]

What it comes down to is simple: the ends are nice, but they do not justify the means. Forcibly taking away a portion of someone's productivity because they want some choice as to what they do with their body is a violation of their rights as human beings.

BMI

[overshoot]

Well, too much in this country is made about BMI.

The problem is that BMI only scales with the square of height -- but at constant proportion, weight goes up as the cube.

Shaquille O'Neil is not exactly fat at 7'1" and 325, but he has a BMI of 31.6 -- well into the "obese" range. A 5'2" woman would have to weigh 173 pounds to have the same BMI as Shaq -- and I know damn well that 173 and 5'2 is rolling fat.

So tell us how useful the BMI is as a gauge of obesity again.