Seattle is happy to make you fat
When it comes to the war on obesity, this place is a merchant of death. Meanwhile, fat America – which is most of us – gets the blame.
If there really is an "obesity epidemic" in America, Seattle has a lot to answer for.
Despite our rep as an outdoorsy city, we've made millions of dollars – billions, really – promoting sedentary behavior and bad dietary habits.
Microsoft put a computer on every desk, anchoring millions of us to desktops and laptops.
Wi-fi allows us to work and play while sucking down inordinate quantities of Starbucks "coffee," which is really sugared milk.
If you want something to go with your "coffee," go into any mall in this country and order one of those little gifts our region gave the world: a carmel pecan Cinnabon roll. It's the size of a Prius and contains half of a person's suggested daily calories.
And then there are microbrews, Jones Sodas, designer donuts, artisanal breads, craft cheeses, Red Robin burgers, topped off with assortments of Fran's and Frangos.
When it comes to the "war on obesity," Seattle is a merchant of death, the Big Tobacco of Tubbiness.
Like many war profiteers, we have a smidgeon of conscience. I mean, even the tobacco industry made "light" cigarettes. So we've activated our inner nanny to mitigate the damage. King County has just taken a stand to restore public health by banning trans fats. Starbucks has moved to replace whole milk with 2 percent. And we are "the best place in the nation to have a heart attack" with our marvelous Medic One system.
You know why we need it.
While Seattle has a rosy milk-fed glow in its cheeks due to growing fat on fat, actual fat people are taking the blame.
Full disclosure: I am big-boned. I was the only guy in my Boy Scout troop with a "beer" belly (it was more likely the result of Nestle's Quik). I speak as someone who has been on the front lines of the war on obesity for 40 years. Unlike most of the two-thirds of Americans who are now considered overweight, I was fat before fat was in. Or at least before fat people became the new scapegoats.
You see, any war needs people to blame for why we're at war, and why we're not winning it. Even though we fat people are in the majority now, we're bad and need to be punished. We're even treated like an oppressed minority.
For example, last week the Los Angeles Times carried a story about how employers have decided to take away the carrot – or the Cinnabon – and use the stick when it comes to fat employees. Employers are starting to institute monetary penalties if workers carry too many pounds. Never mind the intrusion into private lives, never mind that some people are overweight due to genetics or taking medications, the only solution to bringing down health-care costs is to charge a fat tax. No wonder Michael Moore is pissed.
Some fat people, who often have self-esteem issues, think they deserve the punishment:
"At first, I was mad when I thought I would be charged $30 for being overweight," said Courtney Jackson, 28, a customer service representative at Clarian. "But when I found out it was going to be broken into segments – like just $10 for being overweight – it sounded better."
Jackson said she was going to try to slim down before the plan took effect. "If I still have weight to lose when it starts," she said, "I'll deserve to pay the $10."
Employers are getting serious about penalizing workers "because they've run out of other options," said Joe Marlowe, senior vice president at Aon Consulting, a national benefits consulting firm.
That's right, we brought this war on oursleves, so we have to pay the price. The wages of sin are your, uh, garnished wages.
Others aren't so sure it's a good idea:
"It's reprehensible to punish and emasculate someone for having a disease like obesity," said Walter Lindstrom, director of the Obesity Law and Advocacy Center in Chula Vista, Calif. "Anyone who penalizes workers for being overweight should brace themselves for a backlash."
Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute, a Princeton, N.J.-based employee rights group, called the trend "a very dangerous road that could lead to employers controlling everything we do in our private lives."
"To penalize for things that are beyond some people's control is just wrong," Maltby said. "Some people are fat because that's how God made them."
Sure, some people are fat because they're gluttons. But there's more at work here. Besides drugs and genetics, the modern workplace is full of stress, workers often spend their days and nights sitting in cubicles, managers cajole and bribe employees with treats ("management by sheet cake"). Americans are sleeping less, many aren't taking vacations. They work in toxic offices with poor air and climate control. They're fed sugar and caffeine to keep going. They have to commute miles by car to work.
If it's OK to penalize the modern worker for being overweight, what's next? Do we let mining companies tax miners if they get black lung disease?
The only way this makes sense is if you see America's massive weight gain as a huge collapse of moral fiber. You certainly can't blame it on Starbucks, or Microsoft, or even the fact that we the American taxpayers are forced to heavily subsidize the High Fructose Corn Syrup industry. It's the icky fallibility of the overweight that's holding America back.
If taxing fat people isn't enough, how about stigmatizing them as having "fat cooties." Ew. Don't catch 'em.
A new study caused the media to ask the question: "Is obesity contagious?" Of course, the next question after that is, "If it is, why aren't fat people locked up like that weird TB guy?"
The study referred to indicates that there is some connection between gaining weight and the people you know. In other words, habits can spread through social networks.
I'm not sure why this is news. If you've ever had a Jewish or Italian mother, or been in the company coffee room, or attended a family picnic in Ohio where all salads are made of Jell-O, you'd already know that people who eat together grow together. I guess what the scientists have discovered is that since we're all connected in a web of relations and "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" is not about Kevin so much as bacon, and lots of it.
Look, the research is interesting, but the play in the press focuses on the idea that fat could spread like Ebola. I overheard someone talking about the study, and she seemed to think you could get fat just sitting next to a fat person, like they give off molecules that might stick to you.
In the war against obesity, if a fat tax doesn't work, perhaps shunning will.
There are a few people who question the whole idea of an obesity epidemic. Paul Campos has written a book called The Obesity Myth.
And there's an Irish sociologist who believes we're "pathologizing" fat and that the body mass index (BMI) used to determine obesity is wrong and culturally and racially biased. An index that says that George Clooney (and Brad Pitt and Matt Damon) are overweight, which the BMI does, has got to be screwy. I can tell you this: If all fat people were fat like the stars of Oceans 13, the war on obesity would be over. Today.
Since that won't happen, the fat quagmire goes on, and Seattle's high-calorie economy will continue to boom.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Comments:
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 8:57 a.m. inappropriate
First they came for the homeless drunks...: The water is slowly beginning to boil, and most of us little frogs are still oblivious to our coming fate. This is how it begins, folks...little by little, in barely perceptible incriments and anyone who speaks out is branded the "fringe element."
Here are a few examples of how it's done here in our own beautiful Emerald City:
They start by demonizing a marginalized and unpopular segment (like homeless drunks); they pass laws and restrict liberties, but few speak up, because who cares about homeless drunks? The temperature rises, but hardly anyone notices. Then they demonize people who smoke (statistically of lower income), pit the nonsmokers against them, pass even more restrictive laws and the temperature rises more, but again, few speak up, and the ones who do are just the demonized smokers, so who cares? Now they're going for the fat people, demonizing them, passing more laws and maybe a few more will speak up this time, but again--demonized people aren't taken seriously, and who else will stand up for fat people (statistically low-mid income), for crissake? And the temperature will rise again.
More laws are passed every day aimed at restricting movements, activities and personal choices for all but the wealthy. Pay attention, froggies...the water is starting to boil.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 9:10 a.m. inappropriate
seattle was my weight loss plan: When i moved here from Wisconsin in 2000, I inadvertently lost 20 pounds. I attribute it to how walkable Seattle is as well as how much better Seattle's diet is.
I do miss deep fried cheese curds and frozen custard, though.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 9:36 a.m. inappropriate
At Least They're Trying: So I guess the alternative is to simply accept that health insurance premiums will go up for all of us.
FACT: Obesity causes chronic illness
FACT: Obesity is increasing
Therefore, chronic illness is increasing.
Therefore, health insurance premiums WILL go up.
I personally think that people who are morbidly obese (BMI of 40.0 or higher) should have to pay higher premiums or prove that their obesity is due to a medical condition. Morbid obesity is simply not caused by genetics alone.
Obesity is defined as BMI of 30 - 39.9. I think that people from 35-39.9 should probably also have to pay higher premiums.
It gets tougher as you get lower down on BMI because those are the cases where it may be genetics and some people with a somewhat elevated BMI may be more or less healthy.
But we have to start somewhere. We can't just let our population get fatter and sicker. We're ALL paying for it.
And I'm tired of people whining about how it's everybody else's fault that they're stuffing another 1000 calorie cinnamon roll into their mouth.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 9:44 a.m. inappropriate
RE: First they came for the homeless drunks...: The fact that certain behaviors correlate to certain income classes is a red herring.
While we should certainly be also advocating for better food choices in lower income areas (i.e. pushing for real grocery stores to replace liquor stores), education, etc. -- that does not mean we should simply not fight obesity because it's a lower income disease.
That's like saying we shouldn't fight violent crime because many violent criminals are from lower income levels. We fight crime AND we try to redress social problem.
We need to use a carrot AND a stick.
And frankly I think obesity is a problem for all income levels, even if it is more pronounced in lower income strata.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 11:11 a.m. inappropriate
fat is the new smoking: and pretty soon old will be the new fat. Seattle is where we lefties prove the right has no exclusive on intolerance.
As for being sick and tired, I'm S&T; of the "We're ALL paying for it" crap.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 11:42 a.m. inappropriate
RE: fat is the new smoking: Except you can't help getting old. It's not a choice.
Smoking is a choice.
Obesity (for most people) is a lifestyle choice.
(I'm not denying that it's a complex issue. But I think we need to do SOMETHING. If higher premiums aren't it, then there's got to be something else).
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 11:53 a.m. inappropriate
RE: fat is the new smoking: Choices are good, even bad ones. The more choices we have the better. If by doing SOMETHING you mean limiting other people's choices, and fining them or throwing them in jail when they defy you, I'm agin it. Putting up with other people's stupid choices is part of the dues we have to pay to have a free society.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 1:01 p.m. inappropriate
Is there another way to think about health-care costs?: The idea of adjusting health-insurance premiums to one's health index--noted in the comment about paying higher premiums if you're more at risk for chronic health problems--makes sense at first blush. It is, in fact, the way a lot of insurance already works, so we're used to thinking that way. Problem is, it doesn't work. It is a wrongheaded approach and all it does is reward insurance companies. Think about it: Are you healthy folks getting great coverage and low premiums these days? Nope. So why not move away from the insurance-driven healthcare model and look at a public-health model? And, why not separate health insurance from the workplace? It was a good idea when it started years ago; not so workable today. We empowered employers to decide what sort of benefits we get--so it isn't too surprising that the same people might try to dictate who among their employees are too fat, too smoky, too unexercised, too pregnant-too-often. They've been left with little choice, given that supposed "high-cost" employees throw off their premiums for all in this system.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 1:56 p.m. inappropriate
RE: Is there another way to think about health-care costs?: Exactly right. Insurance is not health care. We're letting ourselves be actuarialized into a tight corner. Where does it stop? I'll tell you where, single payer.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 2:11 p.m. inappropriate
RE: First they came for the homeless drunks...: No stick. The stick is more harmful than the problem you're trying solve. Nag all you want with public service announcements, but no compulsion. Police states are not healthy.
Posted Fri, Aug 3, 4:28 p.m. inappropriate
What's the ultimate health sin? Cigarette smoking, of course. Smokers are just around the corner from losing what few civil liberties they have left. Contracts are being let to convert Gitmo into a nicotine withdrawal gulag. Let them smoke generics!
So it is that my Herculean journey from tobacco's dark side to the light of deep breathing was by substituting the sin of smoking for the sin of trans-fatty acid rich, cholestrol-laden, artery clogging, snack foods.
You know what else it was? It was my business! And nobody else's!
Everyone tolerates - some even admire - the streetcorner evangelist. He's free to preach his convictions while calling us to repent and be saved. Some respond and believe, and their lives are changed. Good for them!
But nobody wants to give him a gun with which to enforce his notion of what's best for us even though it may be 100% correct. Yet that's what's happening with nanny state meddling by the King County Board of Health, et al, in restaurant practices and what will be required to appear on menus making them phonebook thick.
Government alone ultimately extracts compliance with its will by force of arms. I can see it now: like prohibition, squads of newly minted Seattle Health Cops conducting a late-night raid at the Ballard Denny's (so what if they damage it's architecturally unique facade) to fire-ax the deep fryer. Eliott Ness, where are you now that we need you?
What people legally eat or smoke (note: I said LEGALLY!) is their business. Government and moralistic busybodies should butt - commonly used pun, so no apology offered - out!!!
As for the cost of health care eventually being borne by you and me, where is it written that it's necessary for me to pay for you or you to pay for me?
We're getting what's coming to us for buying into the notion that fixing the wretched nature of my life and personal habits is your responsibility. It's not, so get over it; I'm a grandfather, and I can take care of myself! Mind their own business!
Even though my eyes glaze over whenever Jean Enersen comes on with her Health Watch (old coot that I am, I just like watching Jean!), I know that if I scarf a Dick's Delux, fries and a vanilla shake, I should take out a card in the mason's union for the arterial cementing that's taking place. And Krispy Kremes, beside being the best bear bait in town, are addictive. I've been known to eat six at a sitting as buzzards circle overhead. So sue me!
But I make some good choices. I've lost 11-pounds in five-weeks because I know that what goes in matters. As a grandfather, I want to live to see my grandson and about-to-be-born grandchild of unknown gender grow up. Not that Grandpa will grow up, but that's another topic.
I'm sick and tired of not being given credit for having a modicum of intelligence, common sense, or awareness about my own health with which to make decisions about my life, my body.
Feminists would burn the city to the ground if 10% of the micro-management of personal choice now extended over us in here were extended to them in the matter of so-called "reproductive choice." The irony in this dichotomy is too delicious to pass muster under all the new health rules and codes.
This proves that we have too many people on the public payroll spending their time justifying their paychecks and thinking of schemes to ensure that their jobs remain secure and munificent.
As for me...I'm hungry!
The Piper
Posted Sat, Aug 4, 10:36 a.m. inappropriate
Insurance companies not Satan: My comment above about moving from an insurance-driven healthcare system to a public-health model motivated a thoughtful reader to email me at some length through my crosscut address and ask, in effect, why I think insurance companies are "evil." Short answer: I don't. I am actually a big believer in insurance--I am one of those people who happily buys extended warranties, who has always had life insurance, home, car, travel--you name it. Nothing wrong with Acme Insurance Inc. making a buck on my need for some extra peace of mind when I fly, drive, rent or own a home, etc. There's plenty of room for healthy profits in the insurance world without tying our healthcare decisions to actuarial tables; I want to decide along with my doc when I need treatment/surgery...I don't want Acme to have a say based on their projections about middle-aged women in my zipcode.
Posted Sun, Aug 5, 9:07 a.m. inappropriate
What will be next?: Now that Fat is a transmittable social disease what will be next? What group will the politically correct pick out to shun? How about children with ADHD. Some researchers are now advancing a theory that ADHD is a precursor to criminal behavior. That's it, lets microchip all kids with ADHD so the Dept. of Corrections can get a head start on keeping track of them. If this insanity continues we will end up with a caste system worse than India's.
Posted Mon, Aug 6, 1:15 a.m. inappropriate
FUBAR: Fat & UnFit Beyond All Recognition: Some people are FUBAR and are clinically sick because of too much food and too little exercise. They're close to death, although they may not realize it. We think it's perfectly appropriate for an ambulance to come to the rescue of someone who's been injured in an auto wreck, so why should rescuing the morbidly obese from themeselves be any different?
Fat can kill. It's as simple as that. So promoting eating environments with less fat makes a lot of sense. Print the number of calories on every Starbucks drink. People have the right to know. Banning trans-fats may be overkill in terms of individual rights, but from an epidemiology perspective, it makes a lot of sense. We expect Public Health to halt epidemics. Some call Obesity an epidemic. So lets get rid of the epidemic - it threatens public health and the health of many individuals, likely including domronr you knoe.
Unfit also kills. So lets create living environments (residential developments) and work environments (office developments) that are walkable and that have facilities (such as parks and trails and fields) that allow individuals to stay fit. This makes for good public policy and acts as a sort of low deductible health insurance, because, instead of infringing on individual rights, it attacks the problem at the population or group level by providing empowering facilties that allow people to stay fit.
Walking is. in my humble opinion, the best activity to encourage to the public, since the halls of the work place, neighborhood sidewalks and even malls can be used to pursue this activity, and people of all ages can partake. Plus, you don't need a gym membership and you don't need to join a team.
Another great exercise for many is swimming, which should be supported throughout King County with dozens of community pools instead of the several aging ones we have now. We should also make it easy to participate in sports beyond the school years by having more fields and more parks.
Actuarially, age, sex and genetics determine fairly standard bell-shaped curves for weight; however, I've seen charts (I can't recall the source) that show that different environments (i.e., countries) vary significantly in their overall "fatness." In general, we want to empower people to eat right, and to eliminate the triggers that enable obesity and bad eating habits. We shouldn't be penalizing people for their age and sex and genetics, but we should be educating them on right ways to eat and to stay fit, and in general, should be removing catalysts from the environment that cause obesity in populations. Maybe that means a curtailing of food advertising, or taxation on fat, or public service videos describing the effects of obesity. The right mix of policy measures may take a long time to get right. I agree with most commentators that punishing and shaming the overweight is wrong and counterproductive. Better to tinker and experiment with public policy that affects entire populations.
Posted Mon, Aug 6, 12:07 p.m. inappropriate
RE: fat is the new smoking: I never suggested "throwing them in jail" or even "fining" them. So let's just cut the inflammatory rhetoric.
Basing insurance premiums on actuarial data is neither a fine nor a jail sentence. It's common practice for many other types of conditions and behaviors -- especially in life insurance.
We're not talking about "putting up with other people's stupid choices". I have no problem with somebody eating until they die.
All I'm saying is that either we let insurance companies effectively price insurance or we ALL pay more for the fattening of the country.
I guess most people on this board are OK with paying more. So be it.
Posted Tue, Aug 7, 1:06 p.m. inappropriate
On average, Seattle is a healthy place to live.: I was very surprised at the angle of this article considering the many times that Seattle has been ranked as one of America's healthiest cities. Compared to many other cities--Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia, Houston--we have a fairly fit and healthy population, (the existence of Cinnabon aside.) Here is one of three rankings I found with a quick Google search (was unable to post the others due to technical issues):
http://www.bestplaces.net/docs/studies/healthy.aspx (Ranked 4th)
Obviously, ratings aren't everything, but they give an indication. Also, we may have opportunities to eat, but we have ample opportunities to exercise. It's a hilly city with great access to outdoor activities and a strong bike culture. Of course there are temptations, this is America after all, where food can be easily purchased at a store, unlike some countries where food or at least a variety of food, is scarce.
I think Seattle has more of a fit culture so it seems like it would be easier to stay at a heart-healthy weight here than in other American cities. I don't think there's anything about Seattle that makes it more of an obesity-magnet than any other city. In fact, quite the opposite.
Posted Mon, Aug 13, 7:28 a.m. inappropriate
RE: fat is the new smoking: Excuse me, you aren't paying more for your insurance because I'm fat. Your premiums stay the same as long as you are healthy and don't use your insurance a lot. Now, if the government provided our health care, and it was supported by the taxes of the working people, you might have some room to bitch if people who don't work and don't pay taxes use it. But that's NOT the case. I happen to be fat (and have been for the last 35 of my 53 years of life). I got that way because I was told that 175 lbs was 40 lbs too much for a woman 5' 9" and I dieted, and lost weight, gained it back, dieted again, lost weight, gained it back, had weight loss surgery (that failed) and gained it back (and every time I lost and regained, I got a little heavier). Did my blood pressure, blood sugar, and cholesterol numbers ever change? No, they were low when I was moderately overweight, and they are still low after 35 years of being of fat. Do I get sick and have to see the doctor all the time? No, I go once a year for a physical. Do I have to take medications? Nope. So how is my being fat increasing your cost of insurance? It isn't, and I'm not the only fat person who can say that I'm healthy. And for your information, when I weighed 175, most people were shocked to hear it, they thought I weighed a lot less than that. And when I tell people what I weigh now, they don't believe I'm that heavy either. So unless you can tell by looking exactly how much someone weighs and how healthy they are, you should STFU. No one has any right to judge anyone else for how they look, we are all human beings with the right to be treated with respect, regardles of our health or size.
Posted Tue, Aug 14, 11:34 a.m. inappropriate
Outrageous Attack on the Worker: This is outrageous! If the U.S. worker sits by and does nothing, we can assume they have completely given up on civil liberties and deserve to live in a nanny state! It is emotionally barbaric for workers to go thru the stress every day of worrying about numbers and denying themselves the slightest bit of pleasure while the salaries of CEOs are doubling and tripling. Want to reduce health care costs? Lets start looking at obscene profits!
Obesity is NOT just caused by lifestyle choices, and all the bigotry in the world won't change science. Not only genetics but stress, lack of sleep(OVERWORK), dieting (rapid weight loss as done on all commercial WL programs cause bodies to be more efficient at storing fat) and even pollution are also factors. (Plug in bisphenol A and obesity into a search engine.) Are going back to the days of the manner house? If a worker was less fit for work because he partied or stayed up with a sick child they were punished. But the master thought nothing of working his servants to death for his own greed. At the very heart of this lies an elitist attitude that we exist for the rich and powerful's benefit.
Speaking of greed, the obesity "crisis" is the most overhyped headline there is. Almost all the scare studies are sponsored by pharma or the diet companies. They include side effects from risky weight loss practices such as fen-phen under obesity. So they can sell more pills, do more damage, then use it as evidence of how harmful obesity is in the first place. Exercise is really the key, fat fit people are healthier than thin sedentary ones. Under this plan, a fat walker would be penalized, but a genetically thin couch potato would not.
Think this won't affect you? Where does it stop? If you get skin cancer and your boss notices your nice tan should you have to pay extra? What if you got into an accident and were speeding? What if your hobby is mountain climbing? Absurd! Fight people, FIGHT!
"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."
Posted Tue, Aug 14, 11:55 a.m. inappropriate
Ignorance kills more people than fat!: It is amazing how people like you can preach without the facts. I am a sociologist who has researched the stigma of obesity for over 20 years! How many studies have you looked up in the journals? Did you know: risky weight loss practices are counted under obesity? There has never been a diet drug that didn't cause harm. All counted under obesity. Side effects of botched weight loss surgery? Counted under obesity. Yo-Yo dieting which raises the risk of cancer, heart disease, and diabetes? Under obesity too. They don't always control for social class, so the effects of poverty like the poor being exposed to pollution (environmental racism) also get included with obesity. Better to blame the poor for their problems that way!
Obesity is ASSOCIATED with some diseases, it has never been proven to CAUSE them. Often times when a fat person is ill, the doctor tells them to just lose weight without ever investigating what else could be going wrong. Weight stigma, inside and outside medicine, also attributed to obesity. And fat people have LOWER risks of other diseases, like brittle bones and infectious diseases. Pear shaped women of all sizes have LOWER risks of heart disease and diabetes.
That is my opinion as a sociologists. As a fat individual, please let me tell you that I don't need saving from a person like you. I am tired of people who have never done the research telling me how to live my life. In my research, I never met one single fat nag who wasn't using someone elses weight as a way to avoid their own problems. I LOVE and am quite comfortable in my own body. Furthermore, being on a spiritual path, I don't need to eke out every last millisecond of life. And even if I did, many of us won't be able to afford a comfortable retirement. Talk about major denial, we have a boom of seniors and an insolvent social security system! I don't mean to be rude, but I honestly resent sharing the planet with you health nags. Let people decide what is best for their own lives.
"Fat can be beautiful. Intolerance is ALWAYS ugly.".
Posted Tue, Aug 14, 12:03 p.m. inappropriate
Then Take the Plank Out of Your Own Eye: Perhaps if you had the courage to fix your own problems, you would not have time to notice what other people are eating.
BTW, take a research class. Obesity has not been proven to cause chronic diseases, it is associated with them. There is growing evidence obesity is just one more side effect related to chronic diseases and something else is the culprit. If you have figured out how to google, try endocrine disrupters and obesity. Synthetic hormones are messing with metabolisms and causing both obesity and diabetes, heart disease and cancer. The powers that be know this. They also know there are folks like you who are only too willing to scapegoat their neighbor instead of fixing the system.
"If someone judges you by the size of your rear, chance are they keep their own brains there."
Posted Tue, Aug 14, 12:23 p.m. inappropriate
Meant to go under comment just above it: Meant to go under the comment about fat people needing saving from themselves
Posted Fri, Oct 9, 5:29 p.m. inappropriate
People are just brainwashed. Its not any one individual, its the 'people.' Our society has such a entrenched culture of making things bigger and making them fast and easy to get. Its one of our nations greatest strengths, but also a weakness. It promotes obesity. In seattle weight loss is such a big business. Government just wants to get in on it!
Posted Fri, Oct 9, 5:31 p.m. inappropriate
Just find a good weight loss diet.
http://www.hcgdietseattle.com