Lincoln University has dropped its required fitness class for obese students that was the subject of much discussion and derision, including from me and our Joseph Anderson.
As a follow-up to my previous post, I wanted to add a few thoughts about creeping nannyism.
Privacy experts are concerned that new smart grid technology, meant to give consumers greater control over their energy usage, might be used to reveal more about your life than you’d intend. Turns out that, even if individual electronic devices don’t have communications capabilities, their unique load patterns can be picked up on usage reports. Refrigerators, toasters, gaming consoles, etc, all generate unique patterns that can be detected on meters. It would be possible for the curious to know when you’re home, how long you use a hair dryer in the morning, and whether you should spend less time on the xBox. And, if your devices have roaming capabilities (electric vehicles, for example), more patterns can be created and detected. [Read more →]
A university in Pennsylvania has decided that students with a BMI of 30 or more must take physical education classes or they will not be allowed to graduate. The motivation, of course, is to make sure that students are being the best selves they can be: [Read more →]
Lincoln University requires fat students to take a fitness class in order to graduate:
The mandate, which took effect for freshmen entering in fall 2006, requires students to get tested for their body mass index, a measure of weight to height.
A normal BMI is between 18.5 and 24.9. Students with one that’s 30 or above — considered obese — are required to take a class called “Fitness for Life,” which meets three hours a week.
The course involves walking, aerobics, weight training and other physical activities, as well as information on nutrition, stress and sleep…
“We know we’re in the midst of an obesity epidemic,” said James L. DeBoy, chairman of Lincoln’s department of health, physical education and recreation. “We have an obligation to address this head on, knowing full well there’s going to be some fallout.”
I realize that Lincoln University is not the government, but its actions here are in line with the direction of public health arguments. Some people have been warning about the totalitarian implications of using public health terms, like “epidemic,” to describe personal health issues, like obesity. [Read more →]
Jacob Sullum’s article “The Perils of Palatability” in Reason magazine is about the efforts of David A. Kessler to tell the rest of us how to eat and to define restaurants as malicious and deceitful because they make delicious food and then have the nerve to tell us about it. In 2007, Sullum interviewed me about my novel Mean Martin Manning, which has a character Kessler might admire: Caseworker Alice Pitney. In the interview, Sullum asked, “Is it hard to write satire in a world that gets sillier every day?” The answer is yes.
Federal tax hike on cigarettes? Smokers feeling abused? Didn’t anybody see it coming?
In my novel The Alphabet Challenge (ENC Press, 2003), I foresaw it years ago. I also foresaw it getting much worse: [Read more →]
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was bitten by a groundhog yesterday (it’s about as cheesy a local newscast as you’re likely to see). Note what an ass Bloomberg is on the video, trying to be funny as he threatens to cut zoo funding. And take some pleasure in how delightfully uncomfortable he seems when holding up the animal that has bitten him.
Sources close to the groundhog tell me it was no accident. It seems that this groundhog — Charles G. Hogg, affectionately known as ‘Staten Island Chuck’ — enjoys activities that Bloomberg has banned or plans to ban. Like smoking. And eating fatty foods. And putting a bit of salt in his soup. And touring the UN on a class trip. And bringing a bicycle on the subway (a little groundhog bike). And taking a photograph without a permit. It’s a long, growing list, but Chuck is a wild and crazy rodent with lots of ‘vices’ that Bloomberg will eventually get around to banning. So Chuck bit the meddling bastard.
The below video is shorter. Sadly, neither video captured any blood or screams of pain, but if you watch carefully, you can see the bite (because you have that kind of time). A still picture is here.
| Groundhog Day |
I thought I wrote a satire. My novel Mean Martin Manning, as a satire, exaggerated certain realities for the purposes of entertaining readers and criticizing a prevalent attitude among politicians and bureaucrats and too many citizens. One of these realities is the American nanny state, the growing government involvement in and regulation of the everyday personal and health decisions of citizens, always for their own good, of course. Almost weekly, something in the news makes my exaggerations seem not all that exaggerated.
New York’s Mayor Bloomberg appears to be on a mission to make my satire into, not a satire of an exaggerated near-future, but a humorous and critical conveying of the present, actual reality. Don’t believe me? Consider Bloomberg’s newest idea, the War on Salt. If you’re familiar with my novel and Caseworker Alice Pitney, I ask you, in the below, couldn’t you replace “Thomas Frieden” with “Caseworker Pitney”?
Thomas Frieden, the city’s health commissioner, said he wants manufacturers and restaurants to join the war on salt voluntarily. If they don’t, the city could pass legislation making it the law.
In other words, “Volunteer or we’ll pass a law that forces you to volunteer.” If I wrote that, readers would recognize it as satire, an exaggeration of government bullying, and maybe even accuse me of being unsubtle. In fact, reflecting the proposals by some to require community service of all citizens, and the service some schools require of their students, I did write something very much like that.
In Chapter 36 of Mean Martin Manning, Caseworker Pitney informs Martin Manning and the rest of the group that they will be spending the day volunteering [Read more →]
Team Leader signaled the sniper to take up position. He hoped to God he wouldn’t have to use him. It was always worst with the young ones. High schools and middle schools were bad enough, and the elementary school last week was a horror story, so many wasted lives barely begun. Even that was nothing compared to today. [Read more →]
Caseworker Alice Pitney is beside herself with delight in her latest post because Nicholas D. Kristof of the New York Times is supporting what he calls the “Miracle Tax Diet.” As you probably know, Governor Paterson of New York is proposing a tax on soda, among a great many other taxes, to raise revenue for the state. The soda tax seems to be getting the most attention because it is being justified as a way to pay for rising health care costs allegedly caused in part by, you guessed it, soda. It is also being supported by Kristof and others as a way to reduce soda consumption (oops — there goes the extra tax revenue) and reduce obesity.
I addressed this issue of whether the “costs imposed on society” by unhealthy behavior could justify government interference with that behavior, in an interview conducted by Edward Pettit shortly after he reviewed my novel Mean Martin Manning in the Philadelphia City Paper.
I, of course, love non-diet soda — Coca-Cola — and am not remotely obese. Attribute that to luck of metabolism, a generally or at least reasonably healthy and low-fat diet, getting off of my ass once in a while, whatever. But when I visit New York, and when other states get around to imposing the same taxes, I’ll be required to shell out more money if I want to buy soda.
Whether or not you think “public health” can justify this sort of thing when it applies to something that you really dislike, like cigarettes, at least we all need to stop pretending that this ever had a chance of stopping with cigarettes. Those who asked, “What will be next?” when cigarettes were taxed, and tobacco companies were sued, were dismissed as paranoid or as shills for Big Business. “They’re just making slippery slope arguments. It stops with cigarettes — no one is coming for your donuts.” Well, fast food taxes have been proposed in various places, and now soda may be taxed, and maybe all sorts of other high-fat food like Twinkies. It is clear that the slope is slippery indeed — the grass is wet and the hose is on. Pitney represents an extreme result of the slippery slope, near the bottom of the hill, but the bottom seems a bit closer this week than it did before.
As for what I think of the government using taxes and other methods to manipulate and control the behavior of adults for “their own good,” I can only recommend that you read my novel, an outrageous satire that, among other things, exaggerates the government’s attempt to control what it deems unhealthy behavior, which seems less exaggerated each day. Also, Jacob Sullum’s For Your Own Good
Update: Governor Paterson explains his obesity tax here and why he has targeted soda. It turns out it’s for the children. No one saw that coming. I’ll drop all objections now, seeing how it’s for the children and all. And how there’s an epidemic. Can’t argue with an epidemic.
Posting calories in fast food restaurants was only the beginning. Fortunately, New York City is flush with cash and Wall Street is far away and the financial crisis and lost jobs will not lower local tax revenues in the slightest, and the city’s schools and other municipal services and infrastructure have all the funding they require. Taxpayers won’t mind that the ”city Health Department is expanding its healthy-eating campaign with subway ads that say most adults should limit themselves to 2,000 calories [a] day” and that point out just how many calories are in that giant burrito you want for lunch. An excellent use of public funds, especially since the AP reports that “officials are betting people will eat fewer calories if they know how many they should consume.” This campaign can’t possibly fail:
Natalia Kaplan, of Queens, said she hadn’t noticed the poster directly behind her on an E train featuring that 1,170-calorie burrito, but she approved of the campaign.
“It makes you aware,” said Kaplan, who said she pays close attention to the calorie information fast-food chains are now required to provide.
“If I go to Dunkin’ Donuts, I look at the calories, and I try to take the least-calorie doughnut,” she said.
Kaplan didn’t even notice the ad that was directly behind her, but she approved of the campaign because “it makes you aware.” I love that. Also, she tries to “take the least-calorie donut.” I think, America, we’re really turning a corner on the obesity thing. Thank you, New York.
The headline by the Associated Press is “Lone Star State serves up frightening Fair fare.” The opening paragraph says, “Everything is bigger in Texas, especially the calorie counts at the State Fair, which will offer such delicacies this year as deep-fried s’mores and a fried banana split.” The brief article then lists some of the other food items available at the fair. There is no content in this article, no point in the AP covering this — it isn’t news. Fattening food at a fair? Hold the presses. In the old days, I guess they only served carrots and rice cakes at the state fair. What’s next from the Associated Press? A story about how there’s a weird-looking guy running the ferris wheel? But this isn’t just about empty journalism trying to fill space on a slow news day. It’s about how journalists can’t resist any chance to put “frightening” in a headline linked to fattening foods and any chance to exploit and perpetuate the idea of the “obesity epidemic.” They’re in the pocket of big nanny.
The AP reports that New York City fast food restaurants have begun complying with requirements to post calories prominently on their overhead menus. Read the full article and note a few things:
– This has been difficult and expensive for small business owners, whose restaurants were included in the regulations even though they were intended for nationwide chains
– Cathy Nonas, director of the health department’s physical activity and nutrition program, might be channeling Caseworker Alice Pitney — she certainly has a title worthy of the great CAP
– A Big Mac is only 540 calories? It would take two just to make a decent dinner
– Are people really surprised to learn that a jelly donut has 270 calories? Really? What are they, ignant?
I predict, boldly, that this will not reduce obesity in New York or anywhere else. I also predict that this initiative’s lack of success will not be seen as evidence that the health officials don’t know what they’re doing. Instead of acknowledging that they were wrong, that people aren’t obese because of a lack of information about how many calories a Big Mac has, government officials will call for more regulations and programs, because, um, there’s an epidemic don’t you know, and the reason they didn’t cure obesity with this last round of regulations was that they didn’t go far enough. Their failure will be why we need to give them more control. The word addiction might come up. Comparisons to tobacco will surface.
Not such a bold prediction, I guess. We all see it coming.
Copyright © 2008-2009 by When Falls the Coliseum, Inc. All rights reserved. Header design and additional graphics provided by Turner Design. Wordpress theme design by Anthony Baggett.
