this post was submitted on 11 May 2025
546 points (82.0% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

31479 readers
5845 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 93 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I can't blame doctors for letting obesity color their opinion. Look around your doctor's waiting room. Everyone is fat. Imagine the suffering and illness they see daily due to fat. How can those observations not color their general attitude?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Look around your doctor’s waiting room. Everyone is fat.

Lots of people are old and age correlates with weight gain. But the volleyball player who blew out her ACL isn't fat. Neither is the chemo patient who is back for a final round.

How can those observations not color their general attitude?

Doctor: "Feels like everyone I see is either sick or injured"

Nurse: "Try spending less time in the ER"

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm not sure your second point works, or maybe I just don't understand it. It's not like the doctor is making judgements that people are fat outside a hospital- they're doing their job. You've got a car and it's starter goes out every year, last time being a year ago. Your car wont start. Whats the first assumption?

It's not ableist or bias to assume that the most common issue is the most likely issue. They see a ton of people whos problems are irrefutably due to their weight. It's not the doctors job to make judgement calls on whether that person is wholly responsible for their situation, it's their job to doagnose the problem and help take steps to fix it. The problem being their weight, the steps include: burn down capitalism and replace it with a system that doesnt incentivise companies to use the cheapest least healthy ingredients, or tell the patient unless they lose weight they're going to die. One of these is completely pointless to tell the patient, the other gives them an unfair opportunity to potentially save themselves.

[–] hissingmeerkat@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Medical care for obesity is currently in most cases like telling someone with a broken starter that they need to run their car more instead of replacing the starter.

If eating too much compared to energy usage is unhealthy then there's already something wrong with the patient that's causing them to eat too much or expend too little energy. Telling them to lose weight might be the only thing within a provider's abilities to do, but it's equivalent to telling someone with a broken starter to leave the engine running.

It is abelist and biased to pass judgement on ones patients for having symptoms of physical, mental, social, or environmental ailments. When a symptom is already socially stigmatized a provider has a responsibility to care for the social impacts of that stigmatization as well, at the bare minimum in one's own dealings with the patient.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Your first two paragraphs i agree with 100%. Your final paragraph i feel is accurate but id want to really mull over that before I really form an opinion. Obv in an ideal world it's pretty easy to assign blame, but our legal and cultural issues are so fucked that topics like that really have to be analyzed in depth under the lens of how that would actually effect reality.

[–] hissingmeerkat@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

analyzed in depth under the lens of how that would actually effect reality

You are implying you imagine some moral hazard where their provider minimizes the risk of the conditions the patient has, and as a result the patient stops seeking treatment. What you're talking about in reality is shame. "Should a patient feel shame talking to their provider"?, and the answer to that is resoundingly "no". Shame is a powerful demotivator, it's function is to stop a person from doing something that threatens their relationships with others or the society they depend on. Trying to motivate someone with shame is counter-productive. All shame in a patient care setting can do is demotivate the patient from seeking care.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nah, the moral hazard is from the doctors side. What can a doctor get away with without risking them losing their job or putting themselves in a dangerous position.

[–] hissingmeerkat@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sorry, "moral hazard" is a term-of-art (something that doesn't mean what it says on its face but is used in some particular way in some fields or professions). In this case by "moral hazard" I meant the idea that if you reduce the harm of some course of action there's a chance that people will engage in it more because it's less harmful now. It usually is applied to risky-yet-beneficial behaviours like injury from sports or from outdoor pursuits. It's ridiculous in that context (I don't think we should make things worse just so they don't get better) and doubly or triply ridiculous when the risky behaviour isn't beneficial or also isn't effectively voluntary.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

Ah yeah, that wasnt what I was trying to imply. I think honestly the main reason that I didnt agree fully was because you were using a lot of terminology in ways that i wasnt sure i understood, and id like to familiarize myself with more of the topic before i formed a distinct opinion of the less clear aspects of issue. Obviously i want everyone to get the help they need though, and I don't think we were ever seriously in disagreement about that. I appreciate the clarification btw, im not familiar with that usage.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They see a ton of people whos problems are irrefutably due to their weight.

Weight is a symptom not a cause. Metabolism, age, injury, psychology - these are causes.

burn down capitalism and replace it with a system that doesnt incentivise companies to use the cheapest least healthy ingredients, or tell the patient unless they lose weight they’re going to die.

Everyone dies. And big people have existed far longer than the advent of processed sugar. But asking people to adopt unhealthy eating habits in pursuit of a tiny waistline isn't healthy.

Too often I see people conflating "Looking healthy" with "looking pretty", absent any of the trade offs necessary to maintain appearances.

[–] SHOW_ME_YOUR_ASSHOLE@lemm.ee 10 points 2 days ago

Weight can cause plenty of issues, it's both a symptom and a cause.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

Everyone is fat

Exactly, which points squarely at an environmental cause, not at individual sloth/gluttony or some shit like that.

The conclusion you're saying doctors arrive at—which I don't doubt you're correct about—is actually completely fucking backwards.

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

which points squarely at an environmental cause

No, it points to people eating processed food and other shit. Guess what, you can still be healthy if you eat healthy.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

So then the question becomes, why is processed food and other shit so pervasive in the average American diet? That's what an environmental factor is.

Refusing to think about the problem in terms of systems because you've got a hard-on for blaming individuals is absolutely missing the point.

[–] Jujugatame@lemm.ee 1 points 13 hours ago

You are 100% correct that we as a society have a problem with this

That's why the individual has to take extra care to eat right and excersise. Their doctor needs to emphasize this as much as possible.

VCan we fix out society? I don't know, I sure hope so. But in the meantime people are responsible for their own health.

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Eating health is a responsibility of an individual.

Trying to blame the omnious evil system instead of the responsibility of each individual is absolutely missing the point.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Then why are Americans so much worse at it, on average, than people in e.g. France or Japan. You can't just say "hurt durr Americans are just irresponsible;" that's a bullshit cop-out and you know it.

I'm trying to have a conversation about what it would take to actually solving the problem here; if you just want to feel morally superior you can go ahead and fuck off.

Oh, and by the way: even if the problem really were that Americans were more irresponsible on average compared to people from other countries, there would have to be a systemic reason why and that's the thing that would be relevant to talk about! Your thought-terminating cliche is completely fucking worthless.

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 hours ago

You can’t just say “hurt durr Americans are just irresponsible;”

Actually, I can. That's why americans are more obese and have more credit card debt - it all boils down to irresponsibility.

I’m trying to have a conversation about what it would take to actually solving the problem here

Solving the problem would be rather simple, subsidize healthy food so a cucumber doesn't cost 6$. Make mandatory cooking classes in school so kids know how to cook, at least to some extent. The magical word is "education".

even if the problem really were that Americans were more irresponsible on average compared to people from other countries

There is no "if". They are.

there would have to be a systemic reason why

No. It boils down to people eating shitty food and not knowing/having no interest in knowing how to cook.

Like, we can argue all day about american processed food being full of additives and sugar and high fructose corn sirup etc, which is certainly the case, but at the end of the day, the people who eat it know that this is the case, so they are irresponsible, and if they don't, it once again boils down to education.

[–] Irelephant@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's the cause I think they were referring to.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 73 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah but your doctor cant prescribe you burning down capitalism, they can prescribe you lower your caloric intake.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah but your doctor cant prescribe you burning down capitalism

Unless....

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 days ago

"Actually officer I have a prescription"

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

The environmental causes are availability of options we crave but are still not forced into, so individual responsibility is absolutely a thing.

I was obese and it sucked but I got down to a healthy weight, and keeping it off kind of still sucks but it doesn't take a lot of time or money, in fact it's generally cheaper.

Fast food is constantly highlighted as an impossibly unhealthy reality, the nicer places cost more and take too much time. Except you can choose passable choices in fast food.

If you can freely pick, there are fast food places that offer salads with maybe some grilled chicken, which can be healthy unless you opt to drown it in ranch.

But let's say you are in a group and they pick a restaurant without an option like salad. Just asking for water instead of a big sugary drink gets you so much closer to healthy. Skip the fries, skip the mayo, get a smaller burger. All these things are cheaper and friendlier to a reasonable caloric budget.

It sucks because it means eating to feeling "ok" while skipping the most awesome foods and rarely getting to feel just utterly full, but that was just life when people had healthier weight.

Similarly on activity. It does suck that work has people sedentary, but our idle pursuits are similar. When I was a kid, TV was stuck on a schedule and video games were only so engaging, so we would get bored and want to do something. Maybe it was walk amongst some trees to see if anytime interesting was around. Maybe do something with a ball. Nowadays we can get endless engagement from streaming, video games, and Internet. So tempting to just be on the couch. We can still choose those more active things, but we don't want to.

Note all this awesome stuff is still great in moderation. I just went full on gorging at a restaurant a week ago on pretty much whatever I wanted. The thing is this is maybe like once every 2 or 3 weeks, not daily like we really want to.