|
Hmm. Could it be that some people simply consider the gains from heavy eating and non-active leisure time worth the costs? Could it be that some people actually prefer their current situation, all things considered? Surely that’s at least a possibility. But the usual suspects immediately assume false consciousness. The rest of the article positively oozes paternalism: “I wonder if Americans walk around and see other people who are overweight and not physically active and that’s becoming an accepted norm,” [Bill Howland, director of research at IHRSA] says. “That’s alarming if that is in fact happening.”If people just didn’t understand the health consequences of their choices, that would be cause for some concern – and possibly a justification for providing people with better information. But the figures here, on the contrary, indicate that people understand the situation. As Howland’s last statement implies, he is not content with making sure people have the approved beliefs – they must also display the approved behavior. The health-gestapo just can’t stand the notion that some people willingly accept health risks in return for other compensating gains. [Guest post by Glen Whitman. Cross-posted on my own blog, Agoraphilia.] |
| Brian Shea February 18, 2005 12:43 AM PST This story from The News of the Weird would likewise fit your outline for the freedom to endanger oneself, though somewhat more graphically than the obesity issue: And a 21-year-old student at the University of Nebraska Lincoln was killed when, not belted in, he was ejected from the back seat of an SUV in a crash; the student was prominent for his libertarian political views, including a defiant stand in the student newspaper against mandatory seatbelt laws. (He described himself as one of "a die-hard group of non-wearers out there who simply do not wish to buckle up.") (January)[Lincoln Journal Star, 1-5-05] | ||
| mishel August 25, 2005 09:25 AM PDT good page http://www.g888.com | ||
| Leave a Comment: |