Insurance (and specifically Medicare/Medicaid) is supposed to cover the cost for a documented need for mobility assistance within the home that cannot be adequately met by canes, walkers, regular wheelchairs, or other mobility devices. If people who qualify for in-home assistance choose to take their chairs outside the home, I suppose that makes sense (although I'm not sure that the drive-through line it KFC is all that appropriate.)
A lot of people who apply for these devices seek them primarily for longer distance travels(as illustrated above) and do not generally qualify for in-home use. That's not to say they don't frequently receive approval for one reason or another.
Used to be when I went to the grocery store and saw an incredibly fat person on a mobility scooter or one of the store's motorized carts, it would make me put back a lot of the stuff I bought to pig out on. I was determined I'd never get *that* bad.
Now I'm diabetic and I've lost a lot of weight, I feel really bad for the people who are still stuck that way.
Sometimes people will make decisions you disagree with and are bad for their health. They will smoke, they will eat too much. They will also live to an age where they need constant medical supervision for a decade, multiple joint replacements, medication pacemakers etc.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html I realise this is the Times, but getting old is actually more expensive than dying young from obesity.
Also, I've seen the effects of a back injury. It seriously impacts ability to earn income, making cheap calories a better option. It reduces ability to exercise, making weight gain inevitable. Yes, these things are avoidable. But not everybody has it as easy as you.
Don't presume you know why someone is fat. It's arrogant.
'Tis a lifestyle that's not sustainable, future generations will see it as one of the many peculiarities of our time.
No reason to get all angry about it.
No reason to lose all reasoning capability either. "Don't presume you know why someone is fat. It's arrogant." is e.g. worthless reasoning: In that argument, you could change "fat" into a lot of adjectives, and all those arguments would be equally right. Therefore it's worthless.
Also by the way don't presume you know how easy "it" is for anyone. It's arrogant.
One more point on reasoning: "Getting old is actually more expensive than dying young from obesity" is another fake argument, since those two aren't the only options. To name just one other: Getting old being obese. Which is probably the most expensive option of all.
I see these chairs as a slow death sentence and despise the companies that are working the system to put as many people in them as possible(i.e. providing their own doctors to prescribe so as to use tax dollars to enable folks to acquire them for 'free').
I think of the scooter question as a modern chicken/egg problem. Yes, man people get them because they have problems walking. But, I have met many people who just stopped walking once a scooter is involved..out of choice. So, which comes first for many people? The scooter or not being able to move well without one?
What is the right term for the (ironic) condition where the victim (of unhealthy food companies) comes or rather rolls in to embrace, praise and apologise for the culprit?
It's called Stockholm syndrome for kidnappings, but it's likely more common with victims of long term fraud, addiction, abuse and oppression: physical, religious, sexual or otherwise. Basically when people give up trying to escape their desperate situation, they accept it as normal and find an alternative coping strategy like denial or blaming a scapegoat, electric scooters.
My father was a lineman for the phone company for 35 years. During that time he fell down many a ladder, worked in freezing cold temperatures, stood knee deep in standing water while water moccasins swam past. These days his knees are trashed. He can barely walk. He can't work out. So I don't begrudge him the cheeseburger or two that he treats himself with to make him happy. It's all well and good to toss stones when you live comfortably, without pain.
Midwestmedic is right, I think of the scooter question as a modern chicken/egg problem. Yes, man people get them because they have problems walking. But, I have met many people who just stopped walking once a scooter is involved..out of choice. So, which comes first for many people? The scooter or not being able to move well without one?
Insurance (and specifically Medicare/Medicaid) is supposed to cover the cost for a documented need for mobility assistance within the home that cannot be adequately met by canes, walkers, regular wheelchairs, or other mobility devices. If people who qualify for in-home assistance choose to take their chairs outside the home, I suppose that makes sense (although I'm not sure that the drive-through line it KFC is all that appropriate.)
ReplyDeleteA lot of people who apply for these devices seek them primarily for longer distance travels(as illustrated above) and do not generally qualify for in-home use. That's not to say they don't frequently receive approval for one reason or another.
Used to be when I went to the grocery store and saw an incredibly fat person on a mobility scooter or one of the store's motorized carts, it would make me put back a lot of the stuff I bought to pig out on. I was determined I'd never get *that* bad.
ReplyDeleteNow I'm diabetic and I've lost a lot of weight, I feel really bad for the people who are still stuck that way.
So?
ReplyDeleteSometimes people will make decisions you disagree with and are bad for their health. They will smoke, they will eat too much. They will also live to an age where they need constant medical supervision for a decade, multiple joint replacements, medication pacemakers etc.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html
I realise this is the Times, but getting old is actually more expensive than dying young from obesity.
Also, I've seen the effects of a back injury. It seriously impacts ability to earn income, making cheap calories a better option. It reduces ability to exercise, making weight gain inevitable. Yes, these things are avoidable. But not everybody has it as easy as you.
Don't presume you know why someone is fat. It's arrogant.
'Tis a lifestyle that's not sustainable, future generations will see it as one of the many peculiarities of our time.
ReplyDeleteNo reason to get all angry about it.
No reason to lose all reasoning capability either. "Don't presume you know why someone is fat. It's arrogant." is e.g. worthless reasoning: In that argument, you could change "fat" into a lot of adjectives, and all those arguments would be equally right. Therefore it's worthless.
Also by the way don't presume you know how easy "it" is for anyone. It's arrogant.
One more point on reasoning:
ReplyDelete"Getting old is actually more expensive than dying young from obesity" is another fake argument, since those two aren't the only options.
To name just one other: Getting old being obese. Which is probably the most expensive option of all.
I see these chairs as a slow death sentence and despise the companies that are working the system to put as many people in them as possible(i.e. providing their own doctors to prescribe so as to use tax dollars to enable folks to acquire them for 'free').
ReplyDeleteI think of the scooter question as a modern chicken/egg problem. Yes, man people get them because they have problems walking. But, I have met many people who just stopped walking once a scooter is involved..out of choice. So, which comes first for many people? The scooter or not being able to move well without one?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the right term for the (ironic) condition where the victim (of unhealthy food companies) comes or rather rolls in to embrace, praise and apologise for the culprit?
ReplyDeleteIt's called Stockholm syndrome for kidnappings, but it's likely more common with victims of long term fraud, addiction, abuse and oppression: physical, religious, sexual or otherwise. Basically when people give up trying to escape their desperate situation, they accept it as normal and find an alternative coping strategy like denial or blaming a scapegoat, electric scooters.
What's the big deal, they are using electric vehicles whilst other people are idling their fossil fuel burning vehicles... to get... the same... food.
ReplyDeleteMy father was a lineman for the phone company for 35 years. During that time he fell down many a ladder, worked in freezing cold temperatures, stood knee deep in standing water while water moccasins swam past. These days his knees are trashed. He can barely walk. He can't work out. So I don't begrudge him the cheeseburger or two that he treats himself with to make him happy. It's all well and good to toss stones when you live comfortably, without pain.
ReplyDeleteIf your father is grossly obese, he's not doing his knee joints any favours by eating cheeseburgers.
DeleteMidwestmedic is right, I think of the
ReplyDeletescooter question as a modern chicken/egg problem. Yes, man people get them because they have problems walking. But, I have met many people who just stopped walking once a scooter is involved..out of choice. So, which comes first for many people? The scooter or not being able to move well without one?