Britains Fattest Woman Dies

[HundredthIdiot]

supersingle said:

The state always picks up the pieces. It removes any incentive to take responsibility for oneself.

Not in this case. she's dead. I'd say dying young of obesity is a pretty big disincentive. It's not a destiny people choose from a brochure, it's a vicious cycle people find them in for all sorts of reasons, like alcholism and other forms of self-harming behaviour. A bit of faffing around with taxes won't make any difference at all.

[Scraggles]

so she was in hospital and the family brought in family sized buckets of kfc for her to scoff, maybe they get something for feeding her to death ?

[Plotloss]

Scraggles said:

so she was in hospital and the family brought in family sized buckets of kfc for her to scoff, maybe they get something for feeding her to death ?

Probate.

[Uncle Fester]

Scraggles said:

so she was in hospital and the family brought in family sized buckets of kfc for her to scoff, maybe they get something for feeding her to death ?

Nail head hit.

Therein lays the problem. It’s not simply a psychological problem in the person themselves but in the psychology of social situation. The people encouraging her to eat derived some psychological benefit from her obesity or eating.

It is not sufficient for the obese person to desire change. The person driving the behaviour and supplying the food must be engaged in the process and change too. Unless this happens the result will be failure and the expense of failed treatments.

Few people start off taking a conscious decision to acquire a lethal addiction like heroin. Someone introduces them to it. Someone has something to gain from them taking it. What that is isn’t always obvious from reading press cuttings. Food differs only in that it’s socially acceptable and necessary to eat something to live. Nobody can give it up, as you can drugs. It's like asking an alcoholic smoker or drug addict to limit their intake without quiting.

It’s often necessary to remove addicts from the people encouraging facilitating and feeding their addiction. Addicts that return to the situation often return to the addiction. It doesn’t matter if its food or any other addiction.

When the person facilitating the addiction is a close relative it’s difficult to exclude them from contact with the patient. It’s also difficult to get the patient to refuse contact with them. A person who has become that obese cannot simply walk away from their family. Until they have lost weight they can’t walk at all.

The fact that they lack the mobility to acquire the food themselves indicates that someone else is encouraging the eating. It’s no different to a person being unable to leave the room to buy heroin. They have no way to get heroin unless someone chooses to bring it. In the case of the obese person trapped in a room they have nothing to do but eat and cannot walk away from the food bought to them. Nor can they walk away from the pressure to eat it when the pressure comes from the person caring for them.

Had this individual been fitted with a gastric band when she first became overweight she would not have been a prisoner at the mercy of her family. I suspect the reason professionals placed her into the care of The Priory was to get her away from her family.

The fees at The Priory are steep for a bed and some vegetables. The NHS needs an economical solution to remove people from those who are pressurising them into eating. Perhaps what’s needed is a hospital in some really remote location with absolutely no accommodation for relatives either at the hospital or nearby and no local KFC. Perhaps a remote Scottish island would be suitable.

Then the person could overcome the addiction and perhaps choose not to return to the social situation that drove it.

[Jinx]

Or we could just provide lard on the NHS. If people want to kill themselves by over eating/alcoholism/drug addiction then surely the economic solution is to provide an excess of each. Hell nicotine patches are available free. Problem solved.

whilst this started as a tongue in cheek comment it makes a twisted kind of sense

[Don]

FourWheelDrift said:

Don said:

They're going to need a really big coffin.

Seriously. That's going to be a logistical challenge. I doubt there are many facilities in the country equipped to deal with it.

[Don]

And, in fact, most aren't...

More than you wanted to know

[munroman]

Uncle Fester said:

Scraggles said:

so she was in hospital and the family brought in family sized buckets of kfc for her to scoff, maybe they get something for feeding her to death ?

Nail head hit.

Therein lays the problem. It’s not simply a psychological problem in the person themselves but in the psychology of social situation. The people encouraging her to eat derived some psychological benefit from her obesity or eating.

It is not sufficient for the obese person to desire change. The person driving the behaviour and supplying the food must be engaged in the process and change too. Unless this happens the result will be failure and the expense of failed treatments.

Few people start off taking a conscious decision to acquire a lethal addiction like heroin. Someone introduces them to it. Someone has something to gain from them taking it. What that is isn’t always obvious from reading press cuttings. Food differs only in that it’s socially acceptable and necessary to eat something to live. Nobody can give it up, as you can drugs. It's like asking an alcoholic smoker or drug addict to limit their intake without quiting.

It’s often necessary to remove addicts from the people encouraging facilitating and feeding their addiction. Addicts that return to the situation often return to the addiction. It doesn’t matter if its food or any other addiction.

When the person facilitating the addiction is a close relative it’s difficult to exclude them from contact with the patient. It’s also difficult to get the patient to refuse contact with them. A person who has become that obese cannot simply walk away from their family. Until they have lost weight they can’t walk at all.

The fact that they lack the mobility to acquire the food themselves indicates that someone else is encouraging the eating. It’s no different to a person being unable to leave the room to buy heroin. They have no way to get heroin unless someone chooses to bring it. In the case of the obese person trapped in a room they have nothing to do but eat and cannot walk away from the food bought to them. Nor can they walk away from the pressure to eat it when the pressure comes from the person caring for them.

Had this individual been fitted with a gastric band when she first became overweight she would not have been a prisoner at the mercy of her family. I suspect the reason professionals placed her into the care of The Priory was to get her away from her family.

The fees at The Priory are steep for a bed and some vegetables. The NHS needs an economical solution to remove people from those who are pressurising them into eating. Perhaps what’s needed is a hospital in some really remote location with absolutely no accommodation for relatives either at the hospital or nearby and no local KFC. Perhaps a remote Scottish island would be suitable.

Then the person could overcome the addiction and perhaps choose not to return to the social situation that drove it.

Great post Uncle Fester, when her case was first publicised I did wonder whether in some perverse way her husband had fed her up as some sort of 'trophy', and the fact that she was bed ridden and needed attention perhaps gave him some sort of role in life?

I agree about removing people from family and 'friends' may be the best thing for them, as otherwise the behaviour patterns continue, clearly she was being fed by the family, if they had supplied her drugs which led to her death might they have been charged with manslaughter?

[hairykrishna]

Plotloss said:

Smokers and drinkers pay more in tax than they consume in healthcare arising from smoking and drinking related illnesses.

Can you support that statement with figures?

[Jez200]

Scraggles said:

so she was in hospital and the family brought in family sized buckets of kfc for her to scoff, maybe they get something for feeding her to death ?

Aren't there fast food branches appearing in some hospitals now? Wouldn't be surprised to find out they were buying the kfc from the hospital... therefore is the hospitals fault... cue compensation to family.

[HundredthIdiot]

hairykrishna said:

Plotloss said:

Smokers and drinkers pay more in tax than they consume in healthcare arising from smoking and drinking related illnesses.

Can you support that statement with figures?

Actually, I read that heavy smokers cost less as they tend to die young and quickly, rather than old and slowly.

That said, my grandfather (miserable old fecker that he was) dragged himself on for several decades with half of one lung left.

[Frankeh]

I don't feel sorry for her or her family.

She should have eaten less.
Her family shouldn't have enabled her to eat more.

[cazzer]

hairykrishna said:

Plotloss said:

Smokers and drinkers pay more in tax than they consume in healthcare arising from smoking and drinking related illnesses.

Can you support that statement with figures?

NHS costs - £100 billion
Smoking makes the government £10 billion
Smoking costs – £2 billion

Figures from the article or links from the article on this page....
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cigarette_ta...

[hairykrishna]

cazzer said:

hairykrishna said:

Plotloss said:

Smokers and drinkers pay more in tax than they consume in healthcare arising from smoking and drinking related illnesses.

Can you support that statement with figures?

NHS costs - £100 billion
Smoking makes the government £10 billion
Smoking costs – £2 billion

Figures from the article or links from the article on this page....
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cigarette_ta...

An interesting link, thank you. It doesn't actually say 'smoking costs 2 billion' anywhere though; what the NHS email says is it costs '1.7 billion in treatment bills alone'.

I had no idea the revenue generated was 10 million though, that's huge, so it seems likely that smokers do pay for themselves.

[munroman]

hairykrishna said:

cazzer said:

hairykrishna said:

Plotloss said:

Smokers and drinkers pay more in tax than they consume in healthcare arising from smoking and drinking related illnesses.

Can you support that statement with figures?

NHS costs - £100 billion
Smoking makes the government £10 billion
Smoking costs – £2 billion

Figures from the article or links from the article on this page....
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cigarette_ta...

An interesting link, thank you. It doesn't actually say 'smoking costs 2 billion' anywhere though; what the NHS email says is it costs '1.7 billion in treatment bills alone'.

I had no idea the revenue generated was 10 million though, that's huge, so it seems likely that smokers do pay for themselves.

I think that when other costs like lost productivity, greater illness and time lost, extra cleaning and fire damage, there will be a lot more on the 'Cost of Smoking' downside.

[IainT]

supersingle said:

There's too much hate on this thread.

I feel sorry for this unfortunate lady and her family. Don't forget they've lost their Mum. Let he who is without sin, etc...

What has 'sin' got to do with dieing from stupidity?

plus - most on here have never sinned. You need to be a religious nutter to sin.

Edited by IainT on Wednesday 28th July 13:42

[okgo]

A young and healthy person probably died today in a tragic accident somewhere in this country yet we hear about this mess.

[HundredthIdiot]

okgo said:

A young and healthy person probably died today in a tragic accident somewhere in this country yet we hear about this mess.

That complaint should be directed at the Daily Mail. They would presumably argue that "Fatty dies after too much KFC" sells more papers.

[Halb]

HundredthIdiot said:

supersingle said:

The state always picks up the pieces. It removes any incentive to take responsibility for oneself.

Not in this case. she's dead. I'd say dying young of obesity is a pretty big disincentive. It's not a destiny people choose from a brochure, it's a vicious cycle people find them in for all sorts of reasons, like alcholism and other forms of self-harming behaviour. A bit of faffing around with taxes won't make any difference at all.

Quite. This issue is more fundamental and complex than state power and VAT on currys. Our whole world is being filled with bad food. Even what some might consider 'good' food is not as healthy as it used to be. Chicken fat has more than doubled in 30 years, everything has sugar in it, and salt is used to bulk up food.
What can you? Hope you live near a local farm who has decent animal welfare and prepare/cook as much of your own food s you can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diet_and_cancer

Edited by Halb on Wednesday 28th July 14:30

[cazzer]

munroman said:

hairykrishna said:

cazzer said:

hairykrishna said:

Plotloss said:

Smokers and drinkers pay more in tax than they consume in healthcare arising from smoking and drinking related illnesses.

Can you support that statement with figures?

NHS costs - £100 billion
Smoking makes the government £10 billion
Smoking costs – £2 billion

Figures from the article or links from the article on this page....
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cigarette_ta...

An interesting link, thank you. It doesn't actually say 'smoking costs 2 billion' anywhere though; what the NHS email says is it costs '1.7 billion in treatment bills alone'.

I had no idea the revenue generated was 10 million though, that's huge, so it seems likely that smokers do pay for themselves.

I think that when other costs like lost productivity, greater illness and time lost, extra cleaning and fire damage, there will be a lot more on the 'Cost of Smoking' downside.

Oh indeed, yer probably right, I was just cut and pasting off the page.
I think, on balance, us smokers pay for ourselves, if only by carkin it earlier.

Put it this way, if we were a net drain on the economy, they would have banned it outright while they had the chance.