FAT OF THE LAND

The BBC was pushing the N.I.C.E. line that we should think about bribing the fat, the smokers, the drinkers out there to encourage them to desist from their unhealthy lifestyles. Today has this broadly sympathetic interview with Sir Michael Rawlins who kept referring to imagined and unspecified “cost savings.” I was invited on the BBC’s Nolan Show to discuss the topic an hour or so later. My view was that this was Nanny Statism, that it has no economic value and that it encouraged irresponsibility. The curious thing was Stephen made it into a much more personal issue as he has weight issues. Now I don’t want to be unkind to anyone but it is tough in an interview when I not only have to argue against the NICE orthodoxy but also against the obvious prejudice of the host. I said that fatness was NOT a disease and that fat people need to get out more, eat less and exercise more. This did not go down well but it’s another way that the BBC make it very difficult for those who oppose the established view.

Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to FAT OF THE LAND

  1. Olly boy says:

    Yes, I heard that interview on Today and Rawlins kept saying “cost savings” and never once did Humprhys challenge him on that. It will be cost INCREASING – certainly in the short term. To call it “cost saving” is, in my view, dishonest because that statement is based upon the fat and lazy people getting up off that fat and lazy arses and going to the gym which, by definition, they probably won’t do. But suppose they all do get up of their fat bums and visit the gym 2/3 times a week to do some solid excercise – how many will pull muscles, injure their backs or suffer some sort of ailment as a result of their excessive weight/lack of fitness? I would say many. This would likely result in them seeking medical attention (costing money) and probably taking time off work (costing more money).

    You can guarantee if it was a Tory on this morning discussing cuts Humprhys wouldn’t have let him say “cost saving” time and time again without challenging him.

    Unbiased?

       0 likes

  2. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Well done, David.  You did get your point across clearly in spite of Nolan’s bias. I was amused at how Nolan twisted your opening words when giving Evelyn her chance.  Also, it seems like a big set-up if she has other health issues aside from being overweight,  So from the start Nolan sets you up as the bad guy wanting to deny services to someone with a serious medical condition.  But Nolan stepped on you when you brought up your own condition.

    The woman says she had an incentive to lose weight, but couldn’t motivate herself to do it.  But another incentive will magically motivate her?  Then she says she does go to the gym and she’s pleased with it, but still wants to put her hand in your wallet?

    I guess Nolan didn’t listen to the woman at all, or to what you were saying.  He still believes that this kind of program would actually motivate people to lose weight, when clearly it doesn’t work.  He cut you off and went to another caller when you tried to tell him that.

    “Fat people need a kick start”.  This is another biased Beeboid using his position and your license fee to promote a cause in which he has a personal, vested interest.  It’s just like Justin Webb reporting on embryonic stem cell research and juvenile diabetes.  Nolan was clearly stating his own opinion and not moderating a discussion.  Nice effort on trying to bust him on it, though.

       0 likes

  3. David Vance says:

    Thanks David – I WAS going to say fat people need a kick but I suppose that would have gotten me even more BBC hostility  😀

       0 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      “Someone agreed with David Vance. Shock, horror.”

      LOL!

         0 likes

    • Millie Tant says:

      You were? What a hoot that would have been. 😀

      PS: You do know that this is a psychological and social issue as well as an economic one, don’t you?  The NHS is extremely busy with these. Anything from alcoholism, to drug addiction to cosmetic improvements, to having a go as one of the other gender. Yep, the NHS will oblige.  But woe betide you if you need a cancer drug and some advanced scanners in your local hospital.

      To desist from eating thus, the fat-inclined would have to desist from a whole way of life.

         0 likes

  4. Bof says:

    They are all at it : http://www.drinkaware.co.uk/, whilst in France last week every other chocolate and potentially fattening advert, plastered with http://www.mangerbouger.fr/ and having been driven by Radio 4 to Classic FM there are now there continual reminders re:
    Grant’s – patiently crafted for you to enjoy responsibly.

    At this rate, any enterprise selling anything remotely wicked will be out of business.
    I smell the hand of EU here

    Meanwhile I will continue to enjoy Talisker (irresponsibly) Golden Virginia, cycling sans helmet, motorbikes, mountaineering, wife and 5 kids-tut tut far too many.

       0 likes

    • john says:

      Bof, if it was Samson I would have agreed totally.
      Am I right in thinking that the left BBC are championing lay-abouts like myself through NICE to receive a blank cheque to mend my ways ?
      What ever next ? A free TV licence for loosing weight ?

         0 likes

      • Bof says:

        John
        If your’e like me you will never get a smell of an oil rag from
        Volksrepublik England. Nearly bought Samson in Adinkerke last week as GV running low.Apparently they are getting fed up taking baccy to Belgium only to have it brought back to Blighty  🙂

           0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Bof,
      5 ?  Sounds like you are a muslim  😉

         0 likes

  5. David Vance says:

    BOF

    Talisker – excellent choice.

       0 likes

  6. David Preiser (USA) says:

    The BBC is pushing the NICE agenda in between Labour love-ins.  Everybody agrees that a cash incentive is a brilliant idea, apparently.  At least I’ve heard no opposing viewpoints at all outside of one man on an obscure regional programme (no offense, DV).

    Left unasked so far, and probably forever:  How will this be enforced?  Does anyone honestly believe that the first Fat Fighter who gets this cash incentive taken away because she didn’t lose any weight after whatever period of time won’t make a huge fuss and claim uncontrollable external circumstances?

    This is a crap idea that can never be properly administered.  But nobody is saying anything!

       0 likes

  7. Abolish the BBC says:

    The fat lobby just want to get victim status, to be told it isn’t their fault, if only somebody would pay them to not stuff their vile faces.

    Not enough fun is made of disgusting fat people, perhaps that would ‘motivate’ them.  They revolt me, as does the BBC.

       0 likes