' Fatism' ? Is this fair...?
The following story is the first time I'd heard of turning down an immigration application on a relatively healthy person because the person's BMI index was too high...does this happen in other countries anyone?................................curious.
New Zealand immigration officials are keeping a U.K. wife from joining her husband "down under" because they say she is too fat, the Daily Mail reports.
British citizens Rowan Trezise, 33, and Richie Trezise, 35, are living apart as she tries desperately to shed the pounds needed to comply with New Zealand guidelines that immigrants maintain a healthy BMI, or body mass index.
BMI is a weight-height ratio that estimates percentage of body fat. The New Zealand Immigration Service requires all applicants to undergo a complete medical examination, which includes body size measures like "waist circumference."
The regulations were supposedly put into place for budget reasons. The country's health care system cannot afford to open its doors to overweight immigrants, a spokesman for New Zealand's Fight the Obesity Epidemic explained to the Daily Mail.
Over half of New Zealand adults and nearly one-third of New Zealand children are already overweight or obese, according to the group. Those figures are expected to rise, as are the health problems associated with being overweight, such as high blood pressure and diabetes.
Richie Trezise managed to trim two inches off his waistline, the Daily Mail reports, bringing his BMI down and allowing him to take the first step toward the couple's dream of resettling in New Zealand.
Rowan Trezise is alone at home and still struggling.
In an interview with the paper, Richie Trezise admitted his wife is having trouble losing the weight — a difficulty which may force the couple to abandon their overseas plans and stay in the U.K. for good.
They've set Christmas as their deadline.
I believe insurance companies are making obese people pay more. Also abortions are not free (even in Canada unless life threatening) and not paid for by insurance.
Frankly I think more taxes should be put on fast food to pay for health care as well. Maybe then we will have more doctors in Canada and shorter waiting lists.
"You don't have to like me for who I am but we'll see what you're made of by what you make of me." Ani Difranco
Gypsy, to aleave your agony about paying for smokers may I tell you that you dont as a non-smoker......the smoker pays for you.
The amount of tax taken from Tobacco products is the main source of tax income for nearly all countries along with Alchol tax.If you consider that the total cost of producing a pack of cigarettes in the USA is 12 cents, the cigarette companies then sell, prior to tax a pack at 24 cents ( yes a nice profit) that leaves an unbelievable amount in tax revenue, however you look at it. These revenues, as much as non-smokers would like it not to be, is the main funder for the health systems within the world.
Not only tax is an important fact when looking at the tobacco industry, this industry, donates and invests in numerous reach projects all over the world,billions of dollars every year yes of course in areas where smoking causes health problems, cancer, Heart disease.
I am a smoker, and have worked for Philip Morris is the past, as a smoker I can understand the dislike of non-smokers, I do not smoke in their presence, dont even smoke in my own home, I try to where ever possible not allow my habit to affect others.
You have a right to complain abou smokers and a right to have smoking not affect you personal health but do not blind yourself to the reality and facts when it comes to the finacial aspects of smoking.
The biggest drain for the Health care system nowadays in developed countries is that we are actually healthier than ever, and therefore we live longer whilst having our diseases cared for...wich, in turn, puts huge pressure in Healthcare and pensions.
You have a point there I guess, but I still don't like paying for people who smoke.
"You don't have to like me for who I am but we'll see what you're made of by what you make of me." Ani Difranco
Gypsy I don't think you can discrimate based on people's lifestyle choices or you may find yourself on very thin ice. Yes smoking is bad but there are all sorts of other dangerous things that are a drain on healthcare. Should people playing rugby or similar sports be denied care or asked to pay extra because they probably will have more medical care required than someone who doesn't?
Where do you stop?
Smoking just happens to be public enemy number 1 at the moment.
I have no way of knowing for certain what is propaganda and what is beyond a doubt fact...but then again can't the same be said of everything....even the link between actually smoking and health problems?
The point is, its not just etiquette that fuels the anti smoking in public campaign, its the health risk....its bad enough all the stuff that's out there that can do you in....but self inflicted damage...and possibly inflicting it on others who are trying to avoid said risk is inexcusable!
Stay safe all.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
you just pasted a full page of propaganda that can be easily found anywhere but that is not supported by scientific data.
I don't know if the above is truth or not, but it is for sure PROPAGANDA. Let's take just one sentence:
"Heart disease mortality - an estimated 35,000 to 62,000 deaths are caused from heart disease in people who are not current smokers, but who are exposed to ETS"
Any scientific data that can prove the above? Couldn't it be that these deaths were caused by other harmful lifestyle habits other than the casual exposure to second hand smoke??? COuld it be a genetic condition that caused the heart disease? How can you scientifically establish that these deaths were directly related to ETS?
Once again, I'm not saying that ETS isn't harmful in anyway at all. I'm not in denial. All I say is that there is waaaaay too much UNSUPORTED propaganda around the subject.
Just a quick web search can reveal some of the following:
Passive Smoking is Dangerous:
Secondhand smoke is a toxic cocktail consisting of poisons and carcinogens. There are over 4000 chemical compounds in secondhand smoke; 200 of which are known to be poisonous, and upwards of 60 have been identified as carcinogens.
When a cigarette is smoked, about half of the smoke is inhaled / exhaled (mainstream smoke) by the smoker and the other half floats around in the air (sidestream smoke).
Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) plays a part in more health problems than you might realize. The following facts point out why it is so important to have smoking bans in place. No one should be forced to breathe in air tainted with cigarette smoke.
Secondhand Smoke and Cancer
The U.S. Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen.
Cancers linked to passive smoking include:
Lung cancer - 3000 nonsmokers die every year from lung cancer caused by ETS
Nasal sinus cavity cancer
Cervical Cancer
Breast cancer
Bladder cancer
Some chemical compounds found in smoke only become carcinogenic after they've come into contact with certain enzymes found in many of the tissues of the human body.
Chemicals in Cigarette Smoke
Nonsmokers and Lung Cancer
The Risks of Secondhand Smoke to a Child
Low birthweight for gestational age
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)- children whose mothers smoked during pregnancy have an increased risk of SIDS.
The EPA estimates that passive smoking is responsible for between 150,000 and 300,000 of these infections in children under 18 months annually
Asthma - According to the EPA, between 200,000 and 1,000,000 kids with asthma have their condition worsened by secondhand smoke every year. Also, passive smoking may also be responsible for thousands of new cases of asthma every year
Chronic respiratory symptoms such as cough and wheezing may be attributed to secondhand smoke.
Children who breathe in secondhand smoke are more likely to suffer from dental cavities, eye and nose irritation, and irritability
Middle ear infections - exposure to ETS causes buildup of fluid in the middle ear, resulting in 700,000 to 1.6 million physician office visits yearly
How Secondhand Smoke Can Affect the Heart
Heart disease mortality - an estimated 35,000 to 62,000 deaths are caused from heart disease in people who are not current smokers, but who are exposed to ETS
Acute and chronic coronary heart disease
Passive smoking has been linked to the narrowing of the carotid arteries, which carry blood to the brain
Exposure to secondhand smoke hastens hardening of the arteries, a condition known as artherosclerosis
Continual exposure to ETS has been shown to nearly double the chance of heart attack
Secondhand Smoke - Worse Than We Thought
Secondhand smoke is serious business, and should be a concern for anyone who breathes it in. Non-smokers inhaling secondhand smoke share some of the health risks smokers face. But smokers do face the worst of it - the risks of smoking are compounded by breathing cigarette smoke in for a second time.
Don't underestimate the dangers of ETS. While secondhand smoke may not kill as many people as smoking does, it is toxic and claims thousands of lives every year around the world.
This is just from a US website....but for every study that says it is dangerous, there are those that say its inconclusive....do you know there are people in the world who STILL think that smoking and lung cancer are unrelated!!!
Believe what you will butterfly, but I for one am grateful for the non smoking laws for more than just etiquette reasons.
Stay safe.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
I repeat: Second hand smoke HASN"T been proven to be harmful yet, there are no conclusive results. All studies in the subject are inconclusive. There is a study that suggest that it may increase the risks to suffer from lung cancer when exposed to second hand smoke in a regular basis (ie when partner smokes) but the risk is so minimal that it is difficult to establish. WHO has been repeatedly criticised for misleading the public into thinking that research proves that passive smoking is harmful in certain ways without providing the scientific evidence.
I agree that non smokers shouldn't be exposed to tobacco smoke. It's just a matter of respect, and non smokers find it very unpleasant to be forced to breath smoke. Myself, I feel very irritated when during my "non smoking months" someone lights up in front of me. But to suggest that casual exposure to tobacco smoke will cause diseases that put a strain in the Health care system of a country is ludicrous.
I reiterate, however, that I agree 100% with the laws that prevent smokers from lighting up in public places. Ironically, since these laws are in place in most developed countries, respiratory tract infections and other diseases such as Asthma are still on the rise every year. I believe that cigarettes smoke is inoffensive compared with the rubbish that we breath daily.
As for prescribing cigarrets, some beneficial effects in mental health have been proved
That car fumes will kill you....but how often in your life will you be cloistered in a tight space with a car, forced to breathe its exhaust, versus smokers if the laws weren't merciful (thankfully).
And second hand smoke HAS been proven to be harmful to others, hence all the laws that prevent it indoors except in special designated spots (at least in Canada...I know none of this applies to the middle east lol...my wife jokes that they smoke like they invented the cure for cancer over here).
On a side note, a saw a documentary about medical practicioners in the 50s in the US that used to PRESCRIBE cigarettes to their patients... talk about surreal lol
Stay safe all.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
I'm not going to argue that smoking is bad for you and blah blah blah, because I'm certain that smoking is not the best thing that you can do for your health. However I just think there is too much hyprocresy surronding all the no-smoking campaigns.
Gypsy, even if it's "only!" 20% of canadians, I'm going to assume that in Canada, like in any other western developed country, between 60 and 90 per cent of the price of a packet of cigarret is levy which goes right into financianing the health care system of the country. This is still A LOT of money!
Ragnarock, there is no conclusive evidence that casual exposure to second hand smoke damages one health. Of course living in a household where a member of the family regularly smokes indoors will have a devastating effect in the health of the whole family, specially the little ones, but I think most smokers realise of the dangers and cchoose to avoid smoking at home at all. Having said that, I don't think second hand smoke is as bad as they make us believe (by they I mean the policy makers). In fact, the fumes we breath during the day are much much more poisonous than cigarret smoke. Don't believe me? Try to spend a nigt, close doors, with a chain smoker and I assure you will survive with no long-term health issues. Now spend a night, close doors, in a small garage with a car and see if you live to tell.
Also butterfly, only 20% of Canadians smoke now, so they aren't supporting the Universal healthcare system.
"You don't have to like me for who I am but we'll see what you're made of by what you make of me." Ani Difranco
The BMI is just a very rough guideline....it does not take into account body types, percentage of body fat, etc...
It is unreasonable to assume that all people the same height should weigh the same....plus (just to illustrate how weird it can be)....When Arnold Schwarzenegger (sorry if I misspeled his name lol) was Mr. Universe, according to the BMI, he was OBESE! LMAO
Butterfly, you do have a point, but you forget to mention that smokers are causing health related issues to the whole society and not just themselves through second hand smoke (whereas the other health sinners are only harming themselves).
Stay safe all.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
it doesn't take into account the body build or make up...Its goes strictly with numbers..Even the medical field is having major issues with this.
You can have someone that is very petite but is all muscle and she/he will end up on the overweight side because muscle weighs more than fat. Likewise, you can have someone of a large bone structure that is very muscular and they measure up to be obese. If you are "typical"..whatever THAT is...then it works..but most people are NOT typical.
I do have to go along with the extra seat paying...being seated next to someone that has to raise the armrest to get themselves in the seat..and it remains raised the entire flight because they can't lower it, isn't fair the to person who paid for an entire seat(next to his large person) but only gets half of it for the entire flight.
"but I still don't want to have to pay anything, even a miminmum cost, to people who purposefully pollute their lungs and then expect other people to take care of them when they get lung cancer".
THe above statement doesn't make sense. I don't really know about Canada, but lets take UK as an example. The fact (and this is a FACT) is that Smokers pay over four times (£7 billion) what it is said to cost the NHS (£1.5 billion) to treat 'smoking - related diseases'. THis sounds like smokers are paying health treatments for many other diseases that are not related at all to smoking. It's not that you have to pay for the treatment of smokers, it is more likely that smokers are paying for other people's treatment. If everyone in UK stopped smoking, the healthcare system would collapse.
Likewise,I would not wish to pay for people who have diseases for over eating, indulgin in promiscuous relations, alcoholism and so on. THe difference is that smokers are the ones who pay, whilst the rest of the "health sins" carry little finantial responsability.
Nope cigarettes aren't cheap, but I still don't want to have to pay anything, even a miminmum cost, to people who purposefully pollute their lungs and then expect other people to take care of them when they get lung cancer.
High fat foods are a problem, and more things should be done about them, especially making the price of fresh foods more readily avaliable to people.
"You don't have to like me for who I am but we'll see what you're made of by what you make of me." Ani Difranco
"Coming from Canada and a Universal HealthCare system I'm sick of paying taxes so someone to go to the hospital from obseity or smoking".
I wonder whats the price of a packet a cigarrents in Canada, is it so cheap that you actually feel that the taxes you pay have to cover the health problems due to smoking? In Europe, smokers feed pretty much the health care costs of their filthy habit because the taxes when buying cigarrents are out of proportion. As a smoker myself, when buying cigarrents in Europe I don't feel that others will pay for the health problems that smoking may cause in the longer terms.
THe problem with obesity is that food that is good for you is considerably more expensive than junk. Fruit, fish and fresh vegetable prices are in the rise, whilst a big mac is a much cheaper option to feed the family, and let the tax payers deal with the health problems related to obesity. Sad but true.
As far as I can remember there was an issue a few years back about obese people flying in planes that if they were too big they had to pay for two seats.
There has definately been issues about people who are over a certain weight, will not be employed as the general idea is that they are lazy.
Even smoking nowadays is an issue because many smokers will not be employed either. If you go to BMW no one is allowed to smoke the bathroom and kitchen always have a fog of smoke in them.
However, I don't think NZ would stop smokers entering the country and although they are also a health risk don't forget NZ is earning tax on the old smokies.
sorry Richard...no riff raff on my jet. you'll have to stick to commercial :)
_______________________________________________________
Love is the answer...
I did this once in Fiji Alexa... take the drugs - AFTER the plane takes off...
I did it b4 and there was a delay and I struggled to stay awake and Suva airport aint' that exciting.
Move over Al Bakr, lets start Diamond Airways. Its gonna be a winner!
Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary. Mahatma Gandhi
lol...saluting at foot of aircraft...the diamond in the sky at your service...
slim, sweet smelling, sleepy mutes allowed who have been freshly scrubbed and deodorized...will that do Richard?
_______________________________________________________
Love is the answer...
I would prefer to chin wag with DG and have John Travolta as my pilot. :)
to travel with DG as your pilot.
Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary. Mahatma Gandhi
What about obese smelly kids who throw their food around and howl for every waking moment of the flight.
Put children in the hold.
Saying that I sat next to two unaccompanied minors coming back from Uganda and their manners left me gobsmacked. These kids were amazing and I was lucky to sit next to them.
on one flight the kid behind me kicked my seat from Doha to Cape Town.
What about flea bites? I got my bum bitten by fleas on my Air Arabia flight!
Or a vomiter.
did not know that skunk could get drunk .... with what
skunk could be mistrustful in unloading their fragrance any time but never drunk
I would rather have one rose and a kind word from a friend while I'm here
Than a whole truck load when I'm gone
bad boy...which would you rather though...what about a person who insists on talking and trying to engage you in conversation for 12 hours whilst slowly getting drunk as a skunk and leery?_______________________________________________________
Love is the answer...
Is it all about probability? An obese person will probably have health issues...a smoker will probably have health issues...what about a woman who has no children but plans to have seven...would that be a drain on the health system or education system...a normal weight sugar addict who may steadily gain weight over the years and may become diabetic.
So difficult to draw the line.
_______________________________________________________
Love is the answer...
You are right. I have experienced all of these things. At least before the recent restrictions, you could carry aerosol spray to relieve the smells but there was nothing you could do to avoid almost being suffocated by a fat person.
Seriously though, I don't think someone should be excluded just because they are fat.
Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary. Mahatma Gandhi
richard!!! what about having to sit next to someone with crippling B.O.? Chronic haliotosis? Extremely smelly feet? The list could be endless...
_______________________________________________________
Love is the answer...
it also sucks when you have to sit next to a seriously obese person on a transatlantic flight when that person is spilling their blubber all over you for 12 hours. It really ain't fun.
Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary. Mahatma Gandhi
Not enough tribal tattoos in her body, to cover her pale skin....
It boils down to medical insurance issues...
They have enough of their own flabbiness locally.
Yes, I'm about denial of a Visa when you are HIV positive. Unless you are being treated for that particular reason in that country.
HIV positive
The Red Pope of Qatar Living
Egomania goes with the territory of decoding your own genome.
Its just my humble opinion...but I thnk replies like:
Such is life
Or its THEIR country they can do what they want
etc...
Sort of miss the point of a public forum! Obviously its up to New Zealand to set their own rules....and I seriously doubt they are browsing this site to read what I have to say and adjust their laws accordingly LOL....but as an intelligent person who just read this article, the OP asked what you think....surely you have an opinion on the matter, one way or another?
Stay safe all.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
Who said "life is fair"
My ship my order... thats how life is
I would rather have one rose and a kind word from a friend while I'm here
Than a whole truck load when I'm gone
being denied a visa for beinh overweight is just as unfair as being denied a visa for being HIV positive or suffering from any other health problem.
Good point Ragna. If you are going to deny immigration to someone who is overweight then you should deny it to someone who smokes. Both will eventually be taxing on the countries health care system. Coming from Canada and a Universal HealthCare system I'm sick of paying taxes so someone to go to the hospital from obseity or smoking.
"You don't have to like me for who I am but we'll see what you're made of by what you make of me." Ani Difranco
their country, their rule.. same as anywhere else...
It IS discrimination, but at the same time, it directly involves a society resources (through health care costs). It probably needs to be tackled from the beginning (ie childhood) and that way its less unfair than singling out fat adults.
Besides, there are so many MORE harmful things to a society you might be immigrating to, but i've never heard of being denied for something like smoking lets say!
Interesting thread DG =)
Stay safe all.
Perfection does not exist. The question therefore, is: what level of imperfection are we willing to settle for?
I think she should be allowed to go over as long as she takes out private medical insurance. If she really wants to lose the weight she will - i would suggest working in a rural community in Africa for a month and it would drop off. NZ gov's perogative I guess.
Obesity is a such an issue now. If government gets tough it is showing a lack of compassion and discrimination. if nothing is done then the government if failing to tackle the issue.
I can't see how a government can win.
my friend is tiny - petite... and she feels discriminated against because she has to pay for excess baggage when she weighs half the amount of many passengers.
So she advocates that people's allowence on planes should include their body weight!
I wish I could do the same in our organization........most would go the chopping board though:)
The art of being wise is to know what to overlook.
Although it is a fact that health problems arising from obesity can be an expensive issue for a country's health system, there has to be a line somewhere.
Some countries do not let HIV+ persons in, but it might be argued that AIDS is contageous, while obesity isn't.
In my opinion, the NZ government's policy is fair ONLY WHEN obesity is hot a result of physical conditions such as hypothyroeidism.
Works for a large recruitment company in OZ, for insurance purposes and given his standing in the company he is required to keep with in his optimum BMI or face the chopping board.