I see fat dead people

[foxy]

In the Sunday NY Times on the first page, was an article about the funeral industry and obesity in America. It seems that there are more people that don't fit in the standard 24 inch caskets. Triple-wide, 44 inch coffins are now being manufactured. They don't fit into the standard graves, vaults or hearses. This all makes for a much more expensive funeral. Anybody want desert?

[Trixie]

US North Americans are the most overweight people on earth. That is a fact, and it is known to the rest of the world. Three years ago, I met a Brazilian on vacation here in SF. Over the course of our first intimate evening together, he said to me "You are not as fat as I thought an American would be." Hardly flattering, but then again I would've hated to have met his expectations!

2/3rds of The World still has to struggle to acquire adequate sustenance, yet here in the US (and in a few other Western Countries) we have to find artificial ways to combat our obesity.

Hitting the gym doesn't even out the fact that a great many people are starving throughout the World, every day. Our coffins may be bigger, but must our hearts remain small?

La Trix

[Doug69]

Ask anyone in the health care industry and they will tell you that one of the biggest public health problems, if not the biggest, is poor diet and lack of exercise. Fat people not only endanger themselves, but cause a huge financial drain on our society by dying early, missing work, lacking in productivity, and just genearlly being in very poor health.

 

It's worse than smoking, far worse than "illicit" drug usage, and certainly infinitely worse than barebacking from a public health perspective. But because so many people are fat, you barely ever hear any condemnation of it, and instead, hear endless condemnation of these far less harmful activities - especially from fat people themselves. Go figure.

[Guest Merlin]

I think it is very noticable how the number of really fat people has increased in the last few years. On airplanes, at the mall, etc. Also, the number of really fat young people. I suspect the biggest single cause is the pizza, which is all fat. People are sometimes critical of McDonald's, but its hamburgers are relatively dry.

[woodlawn]

>It's worse than smoking, far worse than "illicit" drug usage,

>and certainly infinitely worse than barebacking from a public

>health perspective.

 

Why do you constantly make the same false analogy over and over and over again? To correct this for the fourth or fifth time, the health effects of poor diet and lack of exercise are reversible even in extreme cases by a number of different treatment options. An HIV infection is NOT reversible. Is that really so hard to understand?

 

 

> But because so many people are fat, you

>barely ever hear any condemnation of it,

 

Is that supposed to be a joke? I see another television news story about the dangers of obesity every week. Even MTV, a network not known for its hard-hitting news coverage, has shown two different documentaries on young people dealing with obesity just this year. The only way to avoid hearing about this problem is to throw your television out the window and cover your eyes whenever you enter a bookstore so you won't see the prominently displayed books on weight loss.

[Bilbo]

I give regularly to several American Indian relief groups. I mention this just to illustrate than one doesn't need to leave our own country to find people who are in need of our help with some pretty basic necessities.

[Doug69]

>Why do you constantly make the same false analogy over and

>over and over again? To correct this for the fourth or fifth

>time, the health effects of poor diet and lack of exercise are

>reversible even in extreme cases by a number of different

>treatment options. An HIV infection is NOT reversible. Is

>that really so hard to understand?

 

What you just said is, for several reasons, totally incoherent.

 

First, what frequently kills fat people are things like strokes and heart attacks. I've never heard of a "reversible" stroke or heart attack, particularly when they are fatal, as so many of them are for fat people.

 

Secondly, many of the conditions created by being fat - such as clogged arteries, damage to bones, and long-term heart disease -- are often not reversible either, even if the weight is lost.

 

Third, while HIV may not be "reversible," it is now, in many cases, quite manageable and non-fatal, unlike the strokes and heart attacks which kill those of you who are fat.

 

Regardless of any of these issues, poor diet and lack of exercise kill more people, create more health risks, and result in greater financial loss from a public health perspective. That point is irrefutable, and so when searching out public health hazards to preach about, I can't imagine that anyone would skip over this one, since it's the worst one.

 

>> But because so many people are fat, you

>>barely ever hear any condemnation of it,

>

>Is that supposed to be a joke? I see another television news

>story about the dangers of obesity every week. Even MTV, a

>network not known for its hard-hitting news coverage, has

>shown two different documentaries on young people dealing with

>obesity just this year. The only way to avoid hearing about

>this problem is to throw your television out the window and

>cover your eyes whenever you enter a bookstore so you won't

>see the prominently displayed books on weight loss.

 

Check out this Board. I see endless preaching about all sorts of health hazards, but this is the first thread I've seen where someone points out that being fat is a health hazard - and, given the raw nerves this issue touches - I'm sure it will be filled with posts which try to minimize the hazards, like your post does, for instance.

 

You made a very vague, substance-less statment about the frequency of anti-fat commentary which, due to its vagueness, cannot be rebutted. I don't think that any reasonable person would doubt, however, that it is far more common to hear anti-smoking sermons, or anti-drug sermons, or even anti-barebacking sermons, than it is to hear anti-fat sermons, even though the latter is a far worse health hazard.

[woodlawn]

>What you just said is, for several reasons, totally

>incoherent.

 

Please look up the word "incoherent." It's clear you don't know what it means.

 

>First, what frequently kills fat people are things like

>strokes and heart attacks. I've never heard of a "reversible"

>stroke or heart attack,

 

Then you must be very ignorant. The vast majority of strokes and heart attacks are not fatal and produce health effects that CAN be reversed with treatment. Does the name "Dick Cheney" ring a bell?

 

 

>Secondly, many of the conditions created by being fat - such

>as clogged arteries, damage to bones, and long-term heart

>disease -- are often not reversible either, even if the weight

>is lost.

 

On the contrary, the remarkable thing about those conditions is the fact that they often ARE reversible.

 

 

>Third, while HIV may not be "reversible," it is now, in many

>cases, quite manageable and non-fatal,

 

That is false. To my knowledge virtually everyone who has been infected with HIV and has died, has died of an HIV-related illness. While existing treatments for HIV prolong the patient's life, they cannot alter the prognosis.

 

>unlike the strokes and

>heart attacks which kill those of you who are fat.

 

See above.

 

 

>Check out this Board. I see endless preaching about all sorts

>of health hazards,

 

Nonsense. Only a small minority of threads on this board have anything to do with health issues.

 

Considering what a tiny, atypical minority of Americans patronize this message board, it hardly makes sense to point to a lack of threads about obesity on this board as an indication of what Americans are thinking. One could hardly find a LESS typical group of people.

 

>I'm sure it

>will be filled with posts which try to minimize the hazards,

>like your post does, for instance.

 

Nonsense. My only statement is that the nature of the health threat in each case is quite different, so that they are NOT analogous. HIV is an infection that cannot be cured by any known treatment and that invariably results in death. That is NOT true of obesity. Unlike HIV, its effects are reversible in many cases -- in ALL cases if treatment begins early enough. HIV infection is NOT reversible no matter when treatment begins.

 

>You made a very vague, substance-less statment

 

Nonsense. Stating that a particular television network has run two documentaries on the problem is quite specific, not vague.

 

>I don't think that any reasonable person

>would doubt, however, that it is far more common to hear

>anti-smoking sermons, or anti-drug sermons,

 

Talk about vague, substance-less statements that can't be rebutted -- there's one for you.

 

 

>even though the latter is a far worse health hazard.

 

That is highly doubtful. Ask anyone which he would rather have -- a condition that can be completely reversed before it leads to serious health consequences and one that cannot be reversed under any circumstances and see which one he prefers.

[+ Lucky]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

Once again woodie and dougie are having a circle jerk. About fat dead people. hehehe

Where do they get the time?

[Doug69]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

>Once again woodie and dougie are having a circle jerk. About

>fat dead people. hehehe

 

Yes - if only we could reach your elevated conversational heights of spitting out painfully trite one-liners about cock and ass and cum over and over and over again.

 

>Where do they get the time?

 

As someone who has written a frighteningly huge number of posts here - almost 3,500 and counting - I'm sure you can tell us about how to find the time to waste. You seem to have an endless amount of it.

[+ Lucky]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

If you would stick to one-liners, rather than your book-lengtth diatribes... and how about some humor once in a while?

[Guest DevonSFescort]

>The vast majority of strokes

>and heart attacks are not fatal and produce health effects

>that CAN be reversed with treatment. Does the name "Dick

>Cheney" ring a bell?

 

The guy who's had several heart attacks? Doesn't he STILL have a heart condition, or is he considered to be at no greater risk for another one than any healthy man his age? I guess it depends on what you count as "reversible." I'd imagine his condition has improved since it was at its worse, but the same is much more dramatically true of many people with HIV who got very sick and weren't given much time to live before they found medicines that worked for them. Some of those same people are at undetectable viral load today and are in robust health. Isn't that at least as great a "reversal" as any Dick Cheney has experienced?

 

>>Third, while HIV may not be "reversible," it is now, in many

>>cases, quite manageable and non-fatal,

 

>That is false. To my knowledge virtually everyone who has

>been infected with HIV and has died, has died of an

>HIV-related illness.

 

Even if that statement is true (assuming that by 'virtually everyone' we're excepting HIV+ people who didn't die due to car accidents, violent means, drug overdoses, heart disease, lung cancer, etc.), how on earth does that demonstrate that people with HIV won't live long enough to die of other causes? Besides, most of the people who have been infected with HIV and died, died before today's drug cocktails came out. Of COURSE most of them died of an HIV-related illness. The most effective medicines for treating HIV came recently in the history of the epidemic, not early in that history. But the life expectancy of people with HIV just keeps extending, and there are people who were infected in the earliest stages of the epidemic who today have high T-cell counts and undetectable viral loads.

 

>While existing treatments for HIV

>prolong the patient's life, they cannot alter the prognosis.

 

Don't look now, but prolonging the patient's life IS altering the prognosis! People with HIV used to be told they had two years to live. Many of them beat that prognosis and are healthy today. Ultimately, of course, we're all stuck with the same prognosis -- we will all surely die -- but I don't know how you can be certain that everyone who is HIV+ today is doomed to a premature funeral.

 

>Ask anyone which he would rather

>have -- a condition that can be completely reversed before it

>leads to serious health consequences and one that cannot be

>reversed under any circumstances and see which one he

>prefers.

 

I've taken issue already with that characterization above. But leaving that aside, and without wanting to speak for Doug69, I don't think he was primarily commenting on whether it is "preferable" to get HIV or to get fat (though I'm sure it's possible find some people, especially in West Hollywood, who'd say they'd take HIV over obesity any day. Indeed, it has been argued that one reason barebacking seems to be gaining in popularity is that, with HIV less a looming death sentence and more a chronic but manageable disease that to a remarkable degree can be lived through longer than ever and with a high quality of life, many gay men are recalculating the amount of risk they're willing to accept -- because in most cases it actually ISN'T as awful to to get HIV as it used to be). I think he might have meant that, whether it's "reversible" or not, in practice obesity takes a greater toll on our society (in a variety of forms which he outlined above) than HIV.

[woodlawn]

RE: if this message board vanished, would lucky still exist?

 

>>Once again woodie and dougie are having a circle jerk.

>About

>>fat dead people. hehehe

 

>Yes - if only we could reach your elevated conversational

>heights of spitting out painfully trite one-liners about cock

>and ass and cum over and over and over again.

 

How true. Lucky, why does it bother you that other people want to talk about something other than hookers? Is anyone stopping you from talking about the trivial crap you talk about? If not, why don't you mind your own fucking business?

[Bilbo]

I know that I am "weighing in" from what is always one of the top ten, hell, usually top five, fatttest cities in America. And that I am notoriously a Bear, and proud of being a sexy, self-confident Bear with a natural, furry body, etc. However, I see two terms here being used interchangeably and it bothers me. Guys, there is a difference between "fat" and "obese".

[Rick Munroe]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

>spitting out painfully trite one-liners about cock

>and ass and cum over and over and over again.

 

On a message board devoted to escorting and gay sex? How irrelevant!

[woodlawn]

>The guy who's had several heart attacks? Doesn't he STILL

>have a heart condition, or is he considered to be at no

>greater risk for another one than any healthy man his age? I

>guess it depends on what you count as "reversible."

 

I count obesity as reversible, because it is. Doug changed the subject from a comparison of obesity and HIV infection, which I raised, to a comparison of some of the illnesses that can result from obesity with HIV infection. Many of the illnesses that can result from obesity are curable, some are not. HIV infection is never curable; there is no treatment that can end such an infection.

 

>Even if that statement is true (assuming that by 'virtually

>everyone' we're excepting HIV+ people who didn't die due to

>car accidents, violent means, drug overdoses, heart disease,

>lung cancer, etc.), how on earth does that demonstrate that

>people with HIV won't live long enough to die of other causes?

 

I don't want to get into another discussion in which you are asserting as a fact something that no one knows to be a fact -- that is what you did in our previous discussion when you insisted that there is a rise in the number of HIV infections and that barebacking is responsible for it. So far as I know, the current medical evidence on HIV is that the infection is incurable and ultimately leads to terminal illness. It is known that certain treatments will postpone such illness; the ultimate results of these treatments are not known. A physician can give you accurate information on the survival rates for men who have testicular cancer, for example; no one can give you that information for a man who is HIV positive.

[woodlawn]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

>If you would stick to one-liners, rather than your

>book-lengtth diatribes...

 

If he would do that, then what? You'd stop bitching at him?

 

>and how about some humor once in a

>while?

 

How about realizing that Doug is not here to entertain you, and neither am I? You've told people who complain about your posts that they need not read them. Same to you.

[Guest Yog-Sothoth]

>It's worse than smoking, far worse than "illicit" drug usage,

>and certainly infinitely worse than barebacking from a public

>health perspective. But because so many people are fat, you

>barely ever hear any condemnation of it,

 

 

The United States society as a whole condemns fat people and has for many decades if not longer. When was the last time you saw even a slightly-overweight model in a ad in magazine or newspaper?

 

The gay male community is especially contemptuous of fat gay males. All one has to do is pick-up a gay newspaper and read the personal ads which say "No fats".

 

Try to meet someone in a gay bar or a gay social setting and see how you get ignored if you are fat.

 

How many listings are there for fat gay escorts as opposite to ones with athletic builds?

 

There is the Bear community, but not every man who is fat is hairy, and not every man who is fat and hairy is not attracted to other fat and hairy men.

 

I lost 80 lbs. in my 20s and kept it off for 15 years. Then I was put on regular medication which caused weight-gain, so I am trying hard now to loose weight again.

 

Are you aware some of the widely-used anti-HIV medications cause the people taking them to gain weight and pot-bellies?

 

Loosing weight is extemely difficult. You can quite smoking. You can stop drinking alcohol. Can you stop eating?

 

There is an overweight problem for many people in this country. But rejecting them as individuals is not going to help them loose weight.

[Guest Yog-Sothoth]

>>The vast majority of strokes

>>and heart attacks are not fatal and produce health effects

>>that CAN be reversed with treatment. Does the name "Dick

>>Cheney" ring a bell?

>

>The guy who's had several heart attacks? Doesn't he STILL

>have a heart condition, or is he considered to be at no

>greater risk for another one than any healthy man his age?

 

 

My father died of a massive heart attack several years ago. He was in good health, very active, and had even seen his doctor a week before. It was his first and only heart attack and he died within an hour.

 

I was told in passing my a doctor if my father had previously had mild heart attacks, he would have stood a BETTER chance of surviving the one he had, because the heart actually builds up muscle after a heart attack to help it cope.

 

So, yes, someone can have heart attacks and be in better shape to survive future ones than someone who has not.

[chrismac]

>>That is false. To my knowledge virtually everyone who has

>>been infected with HIV and has died, has died of an

>>HIV-related illness.

>

>But the life expectancy of people with HIV just keeps extending, and

>there are people who were infected in the earliest stages of

>the epidemic who today have high T-cell counts and

>undetectable viral loads.

 

>>While existing treatments for HIV

>>prolong the patient's life, they cannot alter the prognosis.

 

>Don't look now, but prolonging the patient's life IS altering

>the prognosis! People with HIV used to be told they had two

>years to live. Many of them beat that prognosis and are

>healthy today. Ultimately, of course, we're all stuck with

>the same prognosis -- we will all surely die -- but I don't

>know how you can be certain that everyone who is HIV+ today is

>doomed to a premature funeral.

 

This exchange brings up a question that's been in my mind for some time: What IS the prognosis for those on the current HIV drugs, and who consistently test with undetectable viral loads? I know a few people who are HIV+, but are in this category. Is there any evidence now, after a few years of this drug program being widely used in the U.S. that the drugs suddenly fail, or "wear out"? Assuming the person isn't infected again with a drug-resistant strain, are these drugs expected by the medical community to continue to keep HIV at bay indefinitely? I haven't been able to locate any studies on this, but it may still be too early to tell, I suppose.

[Doug69]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

>>spitting out painfully trite one-liners about cock

>>and ass and cum over and over and over again.

>

>On a message board devoted to escorting and gay sex? How

>irrelevant!

 

I hate to break this to you - and I know it will be painful - but the purpose of this Board, at least as I read, is not exclusively to talk about escorts. In fact, the subtitle of the "Lounge" section, as written by the owners of this site, reads: "A place to gather and exchange ideas." There are certain sections reserved for talking about escorts, but that fact should reveal that not all sections are reserved for this purpose. So, sadly, this Board does exist for things other than discussing you and your hole.

 

And, my observation about Lucky was not merely that he speaks only about cock, cum, and ass, but that in doing so, he speaks only in "painfully trite one-liners." Personally, I don't care what Lucky posts about here, but I made that observation only because one would expect that if someone was complaining about the content of other people's posts here - as he was doing about mine - it would only be if they contribute great things to the forum. I don't think it's controversial to suggest that Lucky posts only adolescent spittle, which was why I was so surprised to read a critique of my posts from him, of all people.

[Rick Munroe]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

>this Board does exist for things other

>than discussing you and your hole.

 

IT DOES???? :o

[Doug69]

>I count obesity as reversible, because it is. Doug changed

>the subject from a comparison of obesity and HIV infection,

>which I raised, to a comparison of some of the illnesses that

>can result from obesity with HIV infection.

 

That is fucking ludicrous!!! Obviously, when one is speaking about the health problems associated with obesity, one is necessarily speaking about the illnesses which come from obesity.

 

The same is true of HIV - the HIV, by itself, does not kill people. It is the infections and other afflictions one gets as a result of the HIV. Obviously, when one speaks of the health problems from HIV (or from being fat), one is speaking about, in both cases, the illnesses which arise from each condition.

 

And I can't imagine anyone arguing that the health problems which come from being fat (often fatal strokes and heart attacks) are no big deal, nor can I imagine anyone seriously arguing that HIV is clearly worse, particularly since, especially now, people live years and years and years without even the slightest health problem.

 

You claim that I changed the issue, but since I was the one who raised the issue, that is clearly wrong. The issue is, as Devon pointed out, which of these afflictions is more damaging from a public health perspective - i.e., which costs more money, more loss of life, etc. The answer is, and always has been, people being fat and not exercising. Whether one is "reversible" or not is irrelvant to that issue.

 

Many of the

>illnesses that can result from obesity are curable, some are

>not. HIV infection is never curable; there is no treatment

>that can end such an infection.

 

This is just not so. First of all, many, many people die from being fat, as the heart attacks and strokes they get kill them. That is not reversable. Why do you keep ignoring that?

 

Second of all, many people have their HIV neutralized with drug treatments. Others actually have their viral loads become undetectable; that happened, for instance, to Magic Johnson.

 

Third of all, on the aggregate, more people die from being fat; more money is lost; there are more sick days and lost productivity. That is the only issue I raised - that from a public health perspective, the society is harmed far more by fat people than smokers, drug users or barebackers. That is a fact, and it is the one I raised. Why, then, do you keep ignoring it?

 

>So far as I know,

>the current medical evidence on HIV is that the infection is

>incurable and ultimately leads to terminal illness. It is

>known that certain treatments will postpone such illness; the

>ultimate results of these treatments are not known. A

>physician can give you accurate information on the survival

>rates for men who have testicular cancer, for example; no one

>can give you that information for a man who is HIV positive.

 

This is rank bullshit. There are scores of people taking the cocktail, who have been HIV-positive for years and years, and yet who are never sick and are no closer to dying than any random person. This is not unusual. How the fuck could anyone purport to know that the beneficial effects of their drug treatment are finite and that they will ultimately die of an HIV-related disease? Nobody knows that, and other than you, I have never seen anyone pretend to know it.

 

By contrast, fat people are keeling over and dying with great regularlity.

[+ Lucky]

RE: if this message board vanished, would lucky still exist?

 

No. If this message board dies from boredom, say, over these circle jerks, I would not exist. I would simply vanish into that gaping hole that Doug is so fascinated by!

[KY_TOP]

RE: I see woodie and dougie and fat dead people

 

>>this Board does exist for things other

>>than discussing you and your hole.

>

>IT DOES???? :o

 

I always enjoyed discussing your Hole until I actually met you. Then I found out that there were a lot better things to DO to your hole than discuss it. Of course ONE of those things still involves my tongue.