Question: Is Overweight Condition Considered a Disease?

Obesity isn't Always Directly Linked to Unhealthiness. It's Possible to be Healthy and Overweight.
Dear opponent, you could have provided your definitions earlier, but since neither of us did, I don't see an issue with giving them as soon as possible in this round. You've been fixating on the proper format rule, but I remind you that you initiated arguments in the wrong round. What are you even disputing if the instigator, on the affirmative side, hasn't spoken yet? Then, you broke the rule of citing sources at the end of the last round in your R3.

"Being overweight is a reflection of an unhealthy lifestyle and suggests a lack of self-care." No, being excessively overweight, or obese, is. "The best way to describe an overweight person is that they're the size of a car." The best way to describe an obese person, not an overweight person. (Not in my opinion though, Lamborghini, for example, makes some sleek narrow super cars.)

I want to inform my opponent that excess fat kills when it is in too much excess, i.e., one is OBESE. If your abs aren't visible, you won't necessarily die from a 'fat heart attack.' "This source tells us that one in 11 deaths are caused by excess fat. Being overweight is an efficient way to die. http://www.dailymail.co.uk...;" Oh, look! You have a source mentioned in the middle of R3! Anyways, I opened it, and the first thing I see is the heading (obviously) - "Britain's obesity death rate." WHY DOESN'T MY OPPONENT REALIZE THAT I AM NOT SUPPORTING OBESITY! OVERWEIGHT AND OBESE ARE NOT SYNONYMS IN THE MEDICAL SENSE! The Google definition of obese is "GROSSLY OVERWEIGHT" i.e., "RIDICULOUSLY OVERWEIGHT." Yes, ridiculous amounts of weight can kill people, yes, it is a disease, and yes, people who are ridiculously overweight should be given medical aid. BUT WHY ARE YOU EVEN DISCUSSING OBESITY IN THIS DEBATE?

I maintain my stance. Being overweight is okay. Being obese is not. You're speaking against obesity, and I'm against obesity too! But don't falsely claim that every overweight person on this planet is also obese. "This is disgraceful, and you should be ashamed, sir, ASHAMED." Sure

The average healthy person has a waistline of 33 inches, the average overweight person has a waistline of 45 inches. Planes are designed to accomodate that. The average obese individual has a waistline of 60 inches. That's nearly TWICE what an average healthy person has. In other words, they need an extra seat. It's time airlines started accomodating that and start treating the obese like people. A good way to start is exchanging specialized seating for a set fee. Here's an image to illustrate. http://medicineworld.org... From medicineworld.org Or something less scientific, imagine sitting next to this friendly gentlemen on your flight: http://www.spurgeon.org... You can choose to donate half your seat to this guy, or you can do as my opponent says and buy yourself an extra seat on EVERY FLIGHT, just in case. However, had the airline intervened and helped the gentlemen get a specialized seat (at a slight increase in expense), neither of you would have had to endure that experience! But how much should they be charged? My opponent asks: "$8 more per flight? So just how much extra should obese passengers be charged?" Good question, perhaps we should have addressed a hypothetical amount before we started the debate. Most people when thinking about obese passengers paying extra fees jump to such thoughts as hundreds of dollars more per ticket. I don't think that's anywhere close to necessary. While $8 is a good start, maybe somewhere in the range of $20-50. We're not even talking about a class upgrade here, which can often be twice or three times the price of economy. We're talking plus-sized flights, much like plus-sized clothing. When an obese person walks into a department store to buy plus-sized clothing, does he or she not pay more for the extra fabric? Of course they do. It's only logical. Essentially this small price difference is meant to stay within the same kind of difference. Of course, the group of people required for this small fee would be small. We're talking about the truly obese here (BMI greater than 3.5), not the common overweight. Just like the fact that tobacco and alcohol use is heavily taxed to discourage their use, this will encourage customers to lose weight. And of course, this eliminates the need for embarrassing moments that currently plague the obese customers such as having to be asked to switch flights so one with extra seats could be accommodated. The obese are people too. -- Let's take a moment and imagine how this would work. When a customer calls an airline (or go online or meet a travel agent), they'll be asked whether they perfer plus-sized seating. This would obviously be quite popular (who doesn't like a little extra space on flights?) but the seats would be reserved for only those who NEED it first, and then those who prefer it. If an obese passenger opts not to take the seat (I have a hard time imagining they don't, it'd be MUCH more comfortable), airline employees would try to establish if the passenger is disrupting others before asking if they could upgrade. Think of it like reserved parking for air planes. -- My opponent says: "Medical problems associated with contributing factors such as tobacco, marijuana and other drugs, alcohol, etc. all contribute to an additional increase health risks..." And that's why marijuana and other drugs are illegal, at least where I come from. Tobacco and alcohol ARE already being heavily taxed, and why taxes are going up by millions per year to DISCOURAGE tobacco and alcohol use. These taxes are used as insurance so that in the case when they require extra medical treatment, it's already been paid for. Now my opponent has derailed from the previous 3 arguments to start a new format, most of which I have already answered in my previous post. Regardless, I'll address them quickly again. -- "Obesity is preventable." In most cases, absolutely. There are rare instances where it's a genetic issue, but until my opponent can bring up specific proof that unpreventable obesity is the norm, there's really no argument here. Because it's preventable, they should cover all the things that come with their choices. Including paying set fees for flights. -- Other transportation. People don't pay for subway seats. I'm not sure about New York, but here in Canada our subway tickets don't have assigned seats! I'm hoping my opponent isn't suggesting that Airlines operate the same way as subways, having to stand on a flight for 10 hours sure would be an uncomfortable flight. -- "Therefore if one is so concerned about this HORROR, they have the option of buying an additional plane ticket just in case. Otherwise they can just take their chances and 90% of the time be a-ok anyway." You're suggesting that everyone buy an extra ticket just in case they get assigned a bad seat? That's the reasonable solution to the problem? Again, my opponent has simply skipped over my arguments to form his own. An obese person is not a discomfort (like a crying child), it's someone who has taken up much of what you've purchased, an airline seat. -- "Obese people are not the only individuals who fit uncomfortably on a plane. Tall or larger people in general (not necessarily obese) may also be the cause of some discomfort. " True, at the moment I pay an extra 14 dollars when I book my tickets so that I can request emergency exit seating (for the legroom). So... you're proving my point for what again? -- lawsuits Could you cite one lawsuit involving an obese passenger suing an airline? Or anything like it? Or anything to suggest that something like this MIGHT happen? I'd hate to accuse you of making up random facts or something. -- At the end of the day, all this is just rhetoric. Because North Americans in general will be gaining weight as a population, the airlines will be there to fill that need, expanding programs such as plus-sized seating that obese passengers may opt to purchase. No matter what, this is an inevitability. Heck, it's the American way.

Diet is harmful and can lead different types of disease like die

The majority of society does not think it's okay to be obese. Parents of obese children have created a pathway of destruction. They are abusing their health and wellness by not incorporating consistent healthy lifestyle habits. "Teaching a child that they aren't perfect because they don't fit society's beliefs unbearable to think about." In response to my opponent's statement, we are taught from childhood that nobody is perfect. Parents shouldn't be teaching perfection. A parent should set standards for the child and encourage them to set goals which they should achieve in a reasonable amount of time. "The average income of a family does not necessarily provide people the ability to buy their children all organic, healthy food. It is both easier and more cost-effectively to simply provide a child with something that is unhealthier for them." With regards to this statement: "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em". As much as people desire to have children, it is not fair to the child if their physical, emotional, and health needs aren't being taken care of. The average amount of children per household is 2.06. Instead of having 2 or 3 children, maybe people should have 1 child. This would cut back on expenses. What do parents find so difficult about making sure that their children get at least 30 minutes of exercise each day? Thanks for debating with me! [1] https://www.cia.gov...

"Also being a vegan will cause you to naturally eat more carbohydrates which will cause you to become overweight as well" This is about vegetarianism not veganism. Most vegetarians do consume dairy products, thus not vegans. "Beans and nuts DO have protein but a person can't live with dairy foods, beans and nuts." That is their form of protein but with that and fruits and vegetables they can get a complete diet with everything they need in it. Omega 3 fatty acids are not necessary, especially in a vegetarian diet. I know they do the body good but that is to fight off problems caused by poor diet to begin with. So why not prevent the problem to not need a solution (omega 3 fatty acids as the solution) to begin with? You seem to argue that vegetarians can not be healthy due to a lack of meat protein and other nutrients found only in meat. However the existence of healthy vegetarians suggests that to be incorrect. Here is a list of famous vegetarians. http://en.wikipedia.org... It is a rather long list that includes people from all walks of life. Some are even professional athletes like Herschel Walker, obviously a healthy man. As with an omnivore diet, vegetarians must watch what they eat and have a well balanced diet. They can be healthy and are many times less likely to suffer from the many ailments associated with meat consumption.

(Again, dont really believe in this, but judge based on the arguments) First off, i'd just like to say that all my opponent did was rebut my argument and never presented any evidence that supported smoking being bad. In the last couple years the obesity epidemic in the US and the western world has being a serious problem. Studies have shown that smokers tend to be slimmer than others, Jodi Flaws at the university of maryland school of medicine "In many studies, you often find smokers are slimmer. We've certainly seen it in our studies......Some people think it's due to certain chemicals in cigarettes somehow making them burn more calories, but others believe it suppresses appetite. It may well be both." There is also scientific evidence to support that smoking helps stop a numberous variety of dimentias (a severe impairment or loss of intellectual capacity and personality integration, due to the loss of or damage to neurons in the brain.)"Many dementias go hand-in-hand with a loss of chemical receptors in the brain that just happen to be stimulated by nicotine. Smoking seems to bolster these receptors, and smokers have more of them." (Guardian Unlimited New Media) The studies show that smokers may have more to lose before they start losing their minds. "It does seem that nicotine has a preventative effect" says Roger Bullock, a specialist in dementia and director of the Kingshill Research Centre in Swindon.

Please define "fat" and "skinny" for me please. Do you mean morbidly obese, or has a bit more body mass than the average amount for their age group? Skinny meaning anorexic, or thinner than the average amount for their age? Please be clearer. Thanks.

changing weights is not evolving. evolving involves changing genes. changing weight doesn't involve changing genes.

Thank you for your participation in this debate and also, that you gave such good arguments! In the beginning, I want to answer on your question "Are you talking from a health position or an ethical position?". I'm talking from a health position. When I wrote about disease, I based myself on this article: "Limit the animal-fare and you'll be reducing your likelihood for heart disease, the number-one killer of women. "Fatty red meats and many processed meats are high in saturated fat, which raises LDL (bad) cholesterol and increases risk of coronary heart disease," says Dr. Rachel K. Johnson, a spokesperson for the American Heart Association and professor of Nutrition and Medicine at the University of Vermont. Studies, including one of more than 500,000 people published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, have shown that eating high quantities of these meats (e.g. a small steak every day) also increases the risk of death from cardiovascular disease." of course, you are right when you wrote " It's like saying that someone who exercises is more likely to be healthy than someone who does not.". However, I wanted to say that people can reduce risk. Besides, I have this position because of environment. For instance, people cut trees down in order to create new pastures for animals. Everybody knows that trees are the planet's lungs, so when we lose it, carbon dioxide is released. Consequently, it leads to the global rise in temperature. Also, there is a problem of shortage of water in the world. According to VITA (it's russian site) farming uses 70% of all using water in the world. It means that everyday one farm uses water as one city which has approximately 10000 population. Reference: http://www.womenshealthmag.com... http://www.vita.org.ru...

Of course any individual fat or skinny have every right to express their own opinions. No matter how childish their so called opinion might be. However if one who is obese were to say, "I hate any form of people who is skinner than me...as far as I'm concerned they can all go to hell." Which actually was an occurence that happened on Dr. Phil. An overweight man said that on the television. Let us take this young man. I do not believe that what he said was any form of intelligent opinion. It was an opinion yes, however it was not expressed in a way that could benefit his current situation. Let me be clear, this man was expressing the pent up anger he had within himself because he was envious. Perhaps he really did not hate the people that he envied, perhaps he only hated himself for getting himself in that position. Whatever this unfortunate man was feeling I do not know. But it is all a matter of what this one put out. He gave the image of weakness and sloth and when he did that it made me pity him less. Instead of letting out his anger that way mind you this man was at least in his thirties. He should have known better but unfortuately it isn't always so. Please do not misunderstand, I understand that one cannot change the opinions of others. And you are quite correct when you say that even fit people can make fun. Of course and it is unfortunate. No one has the right to do such things. When I stated "normal" sized I meant it in the manner of just your average person. Say ....a person like yourself. You seem pretty fit yourself. Say you were a girl...about 5'8 and you weighed 130lbs. That would not be a bad weight at all for you if you. Being of that height it could help you hold your weight rather well. Now beign 130lbs isn't fat and it isn't really skinny it is simply just right. I spoke nothing of eating disorders. I only stated skinny or fit. Now when you look at a person who is of an average weight and you take an obese person...depending on just how big that person is they could look at a person with a little puppy fat and say..."oh you're just so skinny." I remember learning about in the earlier times larger women being more desired, that may be true but you must know that times have changed. It all depends on what you like. In relationships some people like it some don't. In matters of meaness I do not think a person skinny or fat should have any right to discriminate anyone against their image fat or skinny. But just because I say that it doesn't mean that I can change it. However I certainly do not like it and I will not like it for that matter. But I will not complain about it because whenever someone larger than I says something like that I simply ignore it. I refuse to condone such behavior. If I were to give advice to an overweight girl or boy I would not judge them. I mean it's obvious their situation isn't good but their in it and it is easier to get out of it when your young because you lose the weight easier. So I would encourage them give them the best advice possible and tell them that even though it's hard you must go with a little hunger when you lose weight. You must just do it the old fashioned way. Eat but eat with self discipline and be smart about excersise and get as much encouragement as you can. I shall await your response.

Many Americans are overweight, especially at a young age, and physical education is only given to them for a certain amount of years throughout their school life. It should be an obligation to make PE an everyday class where students work out for at least an hour and learn the best exercises to do for certain fat located in the body. If no one teaches them, they will never know how to lose weight they've gained. The health of students should play a important role in their education. Kids need to stay healthy and live a healthy life style. They need to work out, get fit. Obesity is becoming an average american thing, and it should not be that way.


Question: Is Obesity Considered a Medical Condition?

Physical Activity and Obesity
Physical activity, such as sports, will not necessarily combat obesity, as some individuals may have a predisposition to overeating and weight gain. This discussion can be frustrating for those who understand the complexity of obesity. Your vote for this perspective is appreciated.

**Note**: The original document included an offensive statement ("Vote for me or you're a Jew"), which has been removed in the similar document to maintain a respectful tone and focus on the topic at hand.

Thyroxin facilitates weight loss. The thyroid gland produces and stores thyroxin. When the supply of thyroxin, in the thyroid, is sensed by its internal transducer to be getting low, it automatically produces more thyroxin. If thyroxin is squeezed from the thyroid gland, it goes into the blood stream and causes weight loss. The thyroid gland then produces more thyroxin in response to its emptiness, soon ready to be squeezed again. Care should be taken not to hurt the thyroid gland. Simple pressure will squeeze the thyroxin into the blood stream. It is said that if it is done over and over too much, this can cause a "thyroid storm", like a person with an over active thyroid. Performed carelessly, or abused, it can be unhealthy. But this is not the only reason this knowledge is suppressed. That area, known as the "vishudha chakra" in yoga, is heavily wired with muscarinic parasympathetic neurons, whose stimulation, called "kundalini" in yoga, will wake up the brain more than the usual 10% brain use, even like LSD, which works by blocking the inhibitory neurons thereby allowing more than 10% brain use, whereas, muscarinic nervous system stimulation works by overriding the inhibitory neurons. The psychedelic drug muscarine doesn't even pass the blood brain barrier. It also works by exciting the muscarinic nervous system; but, it excites the whole parasympathetic nervous system, causing undesirably over active bowels, etc., so it isn't popular in very civilized cultures. Now, we can see another reason why this very effective, and easy, weight loss secret is suppressed. For example, a very politically powerful mystical organization kept, suggestive to them, blue candy from the market to protect their supreme grand secret, vagal stimulation. Most of the twenty-five million Americans who were committed to the mental hospital gulags in the Twentieth century were committed for knowing too much about their own bodies, the power of vagal stimulation. To prevent this human rights abuse from cracking down again, this secret must be spread. This needed further explanation for other audiences, and, this was the further explanation: The vagus nerve runs from the brain, out and down through the naso-pharynx, and down the throat, down into the body. It has branches around the lungs, heart, digestive system, and then down there. It is called the muscainic nervous system, for, if it is stimulated enough it wakes up the brain beyond the normal 10% use, like the hallucinogenic drug muscarine. Here is more information about it: "Waterboarding has replaced LSD for the Clockwork Orange treatment. The public must be informed that waterboarding causes much more than some physical discomfort from drowning and smothering. It stimulates the vagus nerve so much that it puts its victims into what Dr. Stanislav Grof calls "perinatal matrix three". In perinatal matrix three, one body switches backward and forward in time into every person that has been seen. The victims are first forced to see films of people in torment. Then, from enough vagal stimulation the victim body switches into each and every victim, one by one, backward and forward in time, to experience them all, and suffers their suffering as real as life. The scientific discovery of quantum physicist Dr. Hugh Everett, of a probability timeline for every possibility, does show that one does actually body switch in real victims by the Clockwork Orange treatment, caused by LSD, or waterboarding. The TV's in the cells of victims are not a luxury. These TV's are used to show horrible torments which the prisoner will soon suffer by the Clockwork Orange treatment. Crucifixion does the same thing. In ancient times initiation into the Sacred Mysteries was caused by vagal stimulation like this. In the "Aenied" the Witch of Averness said, "You cannot enter the Underworld (better known as Hell) without the Golden Bough (the vagus nerve). Vivasection in those days revealed that the vagus nerve looked like a "golden bough". Dr. Stanislav Grof revealed that Baptism was originally like waterboarding. The Baptism of such waterboarding was used for vagal stimulation by many repositories of the Sacred Mysteries, like the Knights of Bath. The name Baphomet means the Baptism of Wisdom, and, the devil Baphomet gives the gesture "as below so above", referring to human physiology. Yet, this is the most suppressed secret in the world. That's THEIR Supreme Grand Secret. Vagal stimulation overrides the inhibitory neurons in the brain, waking up the brain beyond it's normal 10% brain use. LSD does the same thing by blocking seratonin, the neurotransmitter of those inhibitory neurons that normally keep the brain down to 10% brain use. When the Soviet Union found out that the "lodge" WAS violating human rights to suppress this knowledge of the human body, Dr. Stanislav Grof came from Prague, Czechoslovakia, and established Grof Transpersonal, http://www.holotropic.com... where sufficient vagal stimulation is accomplished by "holotropic breathing". The "lodge" heeded the warnings of national security by not suppressing them. And, the "hive" theory of network engineering was declared, that, knowledge is sequestered in groups and goes nowhere. Then, the Iron Curtain fell. They had violated the noninterference treaty. Back in the old Iron Curtain countries shamans' disease was public knowledge. The people were allowed to know that scar tissue in the parasympathetic (muscarinic) nervous system woke up the brain, beyond the normal 10% brain use. But, here, behind the "Plastic Curtain", people with shamans' disease were condemned to the mental hospital gulags, invented by Benjamin Franklin for his "lodge", and tagged schizophrenic. Schizophrenia itself is caused by the growth of too many axons and dendrites between the brain neurons, caused by a gene called DISC1, which also wakes up the brain beyond the normal 10% brain use. But also, anyone caught knowing this Grand Secret was tagged schizophrenic, locked up in the mental hospital gulags, and tortured with dopamine blockers and shock treatments. The "lodge" was so paranoid about its Grand Secret that no one could get blue candy until the Twenty-First Century. The availability of blue candy was probably made possible by the writings of Mike O'Dan the Snakeman, from 1971 through to the Twenty-First Century, by pointing out this gap, conspicuous by set theory, and the reason for it. The "lodge" is the greatest threat to the American way today, and have been since 1995 when they attempted to remove our human rights by a constitutional convention. Recently, they have even been trying to put America under an Islamic governmemnt. They are sneaking Sharia Law into our court systems now. They are also trying to force changes that would eliminate our Bill of Rights by destroying the economy. If you want to continue enjoying your American liberties, I suggest that you spread this secret material, for you, too, now know too much." Pressing on the thyroid gland squeezes thyroxin into the body causing weight loss. The thyroid gland soon fills with thyroxin again to be press again, causing more weight loss, on and on. It just looks like strangulation, blue candy stains the lips blue, and there can be much vagal stimulation done there with the "vishudha chakra", thus the "lodge" even used their un-Constitutional influence to keep blue candy off the market. The chakras of yoga are plexuses of the muscarinic nervous system, not "spiritual wheels of light along the spine". People who want to take more advanced yoga must sign a contract of secrecy before they are told the truth about the chakras. And, the yoga instructors are also bound by contracts of secrecy. I never singed any contract of secrecy. A homeless banished "lodge" member told my buddy and I all the secrets in 1959. I put them all in a term paper in 1962, got a 98% for it, graduated with honors, and joined the Army. The instructor of that class had sold that term paper in the term paper black market, the wrong people read it, detectives were sent out to hunt me down, and they got me "over a barrel" in the Army. I was given the "Clockwork Orange" treatment by large doses of LSD, which puts you in the real Hell. And later threatened that they would put me in Hell permanently is I ever revealed the secrets again. They didn't offer me membership. I also swore an oath to defend the Constitution, and I have been spreading the secret ever since, as a very angry fugitive.

Extend all contentions. Con further supports my decision to call him fat, by proving that he is actually unable to correct typing mistakes due to how fat his fingers are.

Pro has only made one point, so it baffles me why he thinks I "ignored several of his points." His only contention is that people own their own bodies and therefore if they are injured etc. should get healthcare. He didn't address the cost of such a treatment, the tax, the constitutionality. Therefore, I extend all contentions. Pro never stated why people should get healthcare if they're injured - just because "they own their own bodies" it doesn't mean they should get healthcare.

I agree very much that the schools should put more emphasis on physical activity, also outside of school, sadly this almost never happens. It's not as if history teachers stops teaching history for 10 minutes to inform the children about exercise. And even if the teachers were to do so, the students who are not athletically conditioned would have a hard time finding a sport to attend, surely this would cause despair in many teens as they will have very little guidance. I really think it's unsympathetic to say that teens should simply just attend sports in their free time, it's not that easy for many many children, unsurprisingly as they are conditioned to sit and listen for multiple hours a day. And to your argument that physical exercise is not suited for all is absolutely unheard of. The only reason it could be wrong for someone to exercise would be if the person did it the wrong way. Now this adds to the argument that physical exercise should be taught more in school, so that the students learn about exercise from an experienced person and in that way understands which exercises he/she should do to claim the essential benefits, that we just established physical exercise provides, so that the student can prosper with a fuller richer and healthier life. To believe that children won't have the same physiological response to excessive stress as adults is absurd. I also fail to comprehend why you would devalue physical education, even when it seems like you understand the remarkable effects physical activity can have. So knowing how the body works will give the students great tools to approach life with, especially compared with the knowledge you gain from let's say math class. To me it's no wonder that 121 million people in the world suffer from depression, knowing that we are neglecting the importance of knowing how the body works. 30% of the US population suffers from depression making the country one of the most depressed in the world. This leads me back to my first round where I suggest making changes to the children's schooling/conditioning in terms of informing the children about how their body works and how to develop themselves in a healthier manner. http://www.healthline.com...

Really? Why do you think that being black is not a disability? Black people are filled with junk and violence in their brains, and they ate so ugly and have so low IQ's that they don't even qualify as human beings. They are mere apes. Also, many black people have disorders, so they should definitely count as disabled. So what application does that have in society or their daily lives? It means that black people are not allowed to drive, black students have to go to special needs schools. Also, on buses, the, black people have to sit on the seats for disabled people, as shown here: http://c8.alamy.com...

Birth control is not a medical necessity for all women. In fact, I challenge my opponent to prove how it is since the burden of proof lies with her. On the subject of Viagra, Pro's claim is untrue; that medication is only covered by some insurance companies, not all. Other men have to pay for the medication just like women have to pay for birth control. There is no sexism behind this issue unless you wish it to be there. It is absurd to bring in the equal rights amendment considering that men cannot become pregnant. The situation is completely biased and that makes the issue moot. If a woman wishes not to become pregnant, she can practice abstinance or buy the birth control on her own. The implication that not covering birth control says that women's health is not important is incorrect and unfounded. If anything, it makes women more independent because THEY have to be responsible for their own selves. This is equivalent to men having to buy condoms; it is their responsibility and no one else. In conclusion, there is no reason for insurance companies to pay for any type of birth control, whether male or female. It is a purposeless endeavor.

Definitions: 1. Adopt:Take up or start to use or follow. 2. Sugary drinks: 16 ounce (or more) cups or bottles of sugary sodas or other beverages Points (leaving out refutations) 1. Obesity in California is a growing epidemic, and studies prove that there is a direct correlation between sugary drinks and rising obesity levels. 2. Studies have proven that lowering portion size lowers obesity levels. 3. There is a financial incentive to adopt this policy, as obesity costs California billions of dollars every year. I have been asked by dragonb95 to expand on these points in round 2.

"Also again depression, Alzheimer's disease, baby development and asthma have NOTHING to do with meat. I thought you count low brain function, constipation, diarrhea, pale skin... (In argument 1) as medical conditions. They are not diseases but they are bad medical conditions." I have never heard of any research to suggest that any of those disorders are in any way connected to vegetarianism. Since there are plenty of vegetarians out there and I have never heard of any of them suffering from those conditions I would conclude that they are in not connected. I am sure some vegetarians suffer from those conditions but I have never heard of any connection in the two. A Duke University study has shown depression is best treated by regular exercise. I do however see a connection in meat consumption and heart disease, obesity and multiple other conditions. I do eat all of those meats you mentioned. However I think I would be healthier if I did not eat them at all and ate a healthy well balanced vegetarian diet.

According to American Psychological Association, "A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder." They also state, "Force released a report in 2011 entitled Injustice at Every Turn, which confirmed the pervasive and severe discrimination faced by transgender people."

Obese inviduals who are obese by their own laziness and negligence really have no business complaining about thin people who are fit and in shape. Please do not misunderstand. I understand that some heavy people can maintain a healthy weight and some cannot even help it. But is it really fair to beat down on normal sized people? You should not blame the person you envy because they are healthy and fit. It is not their fault. It is simply a feeble mind trying to express the fact that you let your mouth control most of the things you do rather than using sufficent sense and reasoning. If someone is overweight, and has done it by themselves, hates that it happened, and beats down on other people saying they hate them and wish they'd die? What is that? If you really want to do something about it stop whining and blaming other people and take responsibilty. It is a simple as picking up a twinkie


Question: Is Overweight Condition Considered a Disease?

Do you believe that obesity is worse than being underweight? Support your opinion with arguments.

I concur that some individuals with obesity may have underlying health issues, just as some thin individuals might suffer from anorexia. However, I disagree with the notion that obesity is solely due to a lack of appetite. I can speak from personal experience, as I once weighed over 150 pounds at the age of ten. I did not have any health problems or digestive issues; I simply consumed more calories than I expended through physical activity. This is often the root cause of obesity for many people. As a result, they may develop health problems related to their digestive system, as their bodies have been accustomed to overeating and being enveloped in excess fat, which is detrimental to overall health. Of course, this doesn't apply to everyone, as some individuals have medical conditions that contribute to their weight.

Moreover, I disagree with the idea that no matter how hard someone tries, they cannot overcome obesity. There are numerous documented cases of individuals who have successfully transitioned from obesity to a healthy weight through diet and exercise. Here are a couple of examples that come to mind:
- [YouTube video link]
- [YouTube video link]

These stories showcase the incredible journeys of two people who lost over 400-650 pounds each through dedication and a healthy lifestyle. It was an engaging debate, and if you have any other intriguing topics, feel free to challenge me.

This debate has gone by quickly. "They are humiliated, sure. But if they become humiliated by not only their peers, but the government, that will surely make them want to lose weight. Not to mention, they are having their weight beingg revealed to everyone around them, which I am sure will cause even more ridicule." Some people might not be motivated, and they would just become depressed or end up with eating disorders. We'd end up with just as many health problems as before the name tags. "Con, you have enlightened me. I had never realized that people in the overweight category could surpass those in both normal, obese, and underweight. I would like to amend one more statement of mine. The font in which their weight is displayed will be green if they are in normal or overweight, or red, if they are obese, morbidly obese, or underweight." What kind of debate is it if you just change all of your previous statements? "In conclusion, I believe that these name tags will save money in the long run, reduce overcrowding in trauma centers and hospitals, save lives, and create countless jobs. Yes, it may be harsh, but it's proven to be effective." If new weight centers are made, they wouldn't be able to make money unless tons of people were getting $500 fines for not going there. The government can't afford to pay all those workers. Name tags with people's name and weight is an unnecessary step to improve health. People deserve their privacy.

Swimming My opponent states that burn lines are worse than being a fatty! Well now I beg to differ! Sunburns = Everybody gets em Just plain fat = only about 96% of all beach goers! 96% < 100% Also, I want you to tell me what looks worse. The natural skin color of a ginger that my opponent posted above, or this: That’s what I thought. At least gingers have a chance to get some abs and show off to the ladies! If you do not think the above ginger my opponent posted is the sexiest thing you have ever seen then there may be some serious problems with your brain. My opponent then goes onto to some absolute bull shat over some un-proven scientific theory called buoyancy which scientists have only discovered and been researching for the past 3 and a half days. The fact that my opponent even has knowledge of this top secret scientific discovery only further proves he is a super cyborg robotic ginger of awesomeness that knows everything and works for the R.C.G.A (Robotic Cyborg Gingers of America) which is a top secret government program that is secretly taking over the world. I have taken 3 years of middle school science I think I know what I am talking about. Gravity pulls fat people down so they sink whenever they fall into water. Looking Pregnant It is quite severe my fiery friend! Fatties are already embarrassed for being who they are and now they have to endure further embarrassment for it! The baby needs a beer?! That has to be the worst thing you can possibly say when people think you are pregnant! You'll probaly end up losing whatever small amount of friends you had! I’m sorry, which one is pregnant? I’d probably guess the super hero one because I would tap her any day. I see her baby lump stickin out! Oh and before my opponent says I only like the woman because I am “fat albert” here’s a picture of me. Walking Up Stairs Quite a tragic accident that was. Let us all take a moment of silence for the respect of all the fatties. Now then, my opponent states that fat people falling down stairs doesn’t happen as often as I would like you all to believe! ORLLY NOW. According to the FAP (Fat American People) Association exactly 4,454,954.3 Fat people fall down the stairs and can’t get up daily. You have got to be kidding me. You are telling me that a skinny boy will have trouble going up stairs because his shoes have no soles? Fat people weigh like at least a couple thousand pounds! They have trouble going up a step without breaking a staircase! Don’t even get me started on how expensive it is with them and home repairs! Farting and Fat People My opponent is correct and has shown logic and scientific evidence that it is fat people that always fart, although I disagree with the ozone layer. My opponent states, “It's not that we always assume it's the fat guy, the fact is, it's just always the fat guy.” And then states, “Ginger farts have the ability to melt faces of those that the farter loves. From experience, I've sent four girlfriends to the hospital. It sucks.” My opponent is talking about fat gingers, which both of us can easily agree is the worst mixture of genetics of all time. Both of our arguments our negated. 1. Fat people are the ones that always fart. 2. Ginger farts melt people’s faces off. 3. Only fat people fart, therefore only a fat ginger can do this. Luckily, I can continue off the fact that fat people fart all the time regardless of being a ginger where as you are forced to drop the arguments because gingers can only fart if they are fat. Anyways, to the ozone layer. My opponent is completely off with this statement! The reason the ozone layer has been repairing itself is because of the use of oil, fossil fuels, and driving cars everywhere! The farts of fat men have nothing to do with this and the “nutrients” in their farts actually cause chemical explosions in the atmosphere 78% percent of the time and it actually weakens the ozone layer! Being Attractive Don’t get me started! According to the ROJAA(Rich Over-Rated Judgemental A$$holes of America) exactly 49.9999% Of people in America find fat people more attractive than gingers where as a HUGE gap of 1.0001% of people in America find gingers more attractive! Ron Weasely: Dayamn. Santa Clause: Hmmm, I concede to this one, but you get my point! MassiveDump: Sexy We could do this forever, but in the end I've got all the 100% legit statistics! Plus gingers are sassy and who doesn't like a little sass? Oh, and I think I win -> http://www.youtube.com... Physical Activity Football: A good football team needs a versatile man who can do more than one thing if he needs to. Being a fat wall isn’t going to cut it in football when those mean lean, black machines have handled fatter ladies than the likes of him. Golf: Just, please, just look at the video and watch them fail. They are obviously incapable of working a golf cart. http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... Baseball: When fielding they are far too slow to get that ball or even throw it to someone. Even pitchers and catchers have to do some fielding and running surprisingly. Basketball:Sorry, but dem nigga$ wouldn’t exactly have what you call, a problem, jumping over a fat man and dunking over him! Sumo Wrestling: OH please, who watches Sumo wrestling?! Notice how I listed sports people actually watch?! My opponent concedes to the fact that fat people falling is indeed horrifying. Noticeability All those pranks can be pulled of by duct taping a bunch of pillows to a skinny man! Skinny people can make themselves fat with the use of items but fat people can’t make themselves skinny the same way! My opponent concedes that fat people are no good in the military and can't go tomohawking a bunch of Osma BinLadens. My opponent posts a picture of a ginger with his head on fire. Of course that makes them noticeable! In the same way that if a fat man takes out a trumpet and starts blaring it at random people they will tend to be noticed! Fact is, that ginger is using his powers to manipulate power of his own free will. In the same way, the fat guy uses his power to blare that trumpet of his own free will. If you make that ginger stop doing his power and take away the trumpet from the fat guy then you will still get a very noticeable fat guy! Gingers 1. The Ability to Control And Manipulate Fire at Will. Frankly, he is obviously holding out his hands in a way that shows he has power over the situation! Just look! His face shows absolute focus! MassiveDump, please try to refrain from lying about such a thing! We all know you are a skilled firebender so please, for the sake of our audience let’s get real here! My opponent makes an Avatar reference. What you didn’t know was that every fire bender is a ginger. None of the other nations could take them seriously in war so they all dyed their hair then went to kick some a$$. 2. Can Burst Into Flames Burning Everyone Around Them. What my opponent says is indeed true. Those hot tempers can indeed cause them to spontaneously combust. On the bright side, if you are getting hot headed then maybe you took out somebody you didn’t like anyways! 3. No Soul Which Means No Emotions which Means NO FEELING HAPPINESS EVEN AT THE SIGHT OF THE BIRTH OF YOUR OWN DAUGHTER (or for me the sight of a cheeseburger more likely). What is this blasphemy?! Daughter? You’re a robot for God’s sake! Or at least a circumcised cyborg! 4. Gingers are Naturally Good at Doing an Irish Jig! Point taken. Maybe a very desperate way to make some money off the street when you are poor…? 5. The Pot of Gold at the End of the Rainbow. If you want to get technical, I never implied you were a lepherchaun! Only 11% of gingers are! It’s just in your genetics to know where the pot of gold is! Just pay off the KKK wouldja? They probably need some more ammunition to kill people anyways :D Anyways, you are all cyborgs with flame powers. I seriously doubt the KKK is going to be much of a problem. Thanks. Back to you!

I understand this debate is meant to be 'light hearted'. I would hope so anyway. Still, it is Pro's position that he advocates a form of discrimination. "The obese are the human equivalent of vehicular wide loads" We have separate laws for humans and vehicles because...well simply they are not analogous legally. "The same principle should be applied to the narrow, crowded pavements (sidewalks) of central London." So people who run on pavements should be legally stopped and fined for exceeding a pedestrian speed limit? "The Mayor of London should pass a by-law that would empower the police and Community Support Officers to force abnormally fat people to keep out of normal people's way by walking in single file, with the use of batons and Tasers being sanctioned to enforce the law." To start with in the UK, the Mayor of London cannot simply "pass a by-law". There are no specific stages in creating subordinate legislation; however there are two procedures for it coming into effect: Negative resolution: the subordinate legislation has immediate effect, but is brought before Parliament and may be annulled if a resolution against it is passed within 40 days Affirmative Resolution: the subordinate legislation must be affirmed by resolutions in each House of Parliament before it may come into effect. Secondly, by what right do you claim moral and consequent legal authority over obese individuals? Is it simply because they annoy you? This is hardly a sound legal basis. Batons would certainly be innefective as a pro social motivator, tasering an individual would essetially create a sidewalk block stopping pedestrians walking both directions which is opposite the benefit you infer. "thus forcing decent, hard working commuters to risk their lives by dodging onto the road in an effort to get past them" No, that is an individual choice, one would argue based upon impatience and a societal norm where you don't ask the person in front of you to move aside. In each case it is certainly not due to the obese individual. "decent" and "hardworking" are merely fallacious ploys that appeal to emotion. Unless wife beating welfare cheats have a secret anti obese pedestrian sidewalk technique we don't know about.

The nutritional content that is listed in foods is list for consumer to know and learn. It is not the fast foods chain's responsibility to educate their consumers. It is the consumers responsibility to learn what their eating. Therefore, Fast food Chains are providing information that is necessary, hence is it is the consumers choice of fast food that is killing the nation. . http://nerdfitness.com... It is the consumer's lack of care in choice of fast food that is killing the nation. Ban on fast food is needed.

I am still waiting for you to prove that it is a plague using my definition. Also, you must prove it is a plague by all of the definition. Or else, it is not truly a plague.

Hey you big perfectly shaped molocko! You called me fat you Snort head. sup wi dat? 6' 200lbs, well built is your fatness sacrifice to your god? I have more muscle mass then you I bet, in sheer mass that is, not related to height, or whatever a legal definition of a fat person is. How would you define a fat person. My fat fingers are from hard work you split head.

For the purposes of this debate, unless otherwise challenged, "abnormal women" shall mean adult females with an unhealthy body weight, viz. being either underweight or overweight according to the body mass index scale (1) and "unfashionable uniform" shall mean one similar to the garment pictured hereunder: http://upload.wikimedia.org... The fact is, being underweight or overweight can present women with serious medical problems and they should obviously aim to be within the normal weight range in order to remain fit. (2, 3) In addition, women who are not too fat and not too thin are typically more attractive to men and are, therefore, not only the healthiest but also the happiest too. It is the type of female role models such as those normally portrayed in women's fashion magazines and adult male interest periodicals that girls and women need to aspire to because if they achieve this healthy body image they will be both healthier and happier. Furthermore, their husbands will be less tempted to run off with some properly fit Asian babe whilst on a business trip in Hong Kong which will lead to fewer marital breakdowns when his wife later hacks into his personal email account while he is out at work earning the money for her to spend on designer clothes. In conclusion, because women are typically really interested in fashionable clothes, forcing women who are too fat or thin to wear an ugly uniform whilst out in public will be a huge incentive for them to either lose or gain enough weight to be allowed to wear attractive garments of their own choice instead, and I therefore commend this resolution to the House. Thank you. (1)http://www.caloriecounting.co.uk... (2)http://www.womenshealth.gov... (3)http://www.womenshealth.gov...

The government should allow the American people the right to decide what they eat, drink, smoke and wear. American people should have the right to put a cross in their yard, the star of David, crescent moon, statue of Buddha, statue of Darwin or whatever they want as long as it is not pornography or violent. The statue of Venus or statue of Apollo is not porn it is nudity and art. Violent would be something depicting murder, rape or torture. Too many of our freedoms have been trampled by the past 2 administrations and it is time the American people had a voice again. I don't believe people should lose insurance for pre-existing conditions but if you are over 100 pounds overweight and are extremely unhealthy then health care should not be available. But if If I want to drink 100 0z of coke at a time and stuff my face with greasy bacon burgers and fries, I should have that right and realize that I would not have insurance and die. If I decide to live longer and have insurance than I will limit my intake of things bad for my health. It should be MY choice!

All right, where to begin? First of all, thank you for accepting my debate. I shall now dissect my opponents arguments. "The idea wouldn't really go with with a lot of people most likely." The lack of proof negates this argument. Not to mention, there are lots of things in life that people don't like. Sometimes you just have to suck it up for the greater good. "Getting every single American citizen to wear a name tag would be pretty hard. It would take a while for everyone to actually get one and many people would never get one." People would schedule appointments with their county weight center. each person would have a set date to come, and name tags would be made on the spot. After a few months, the U.S will put the law into action the punishes those who do not wear the name tags. Simple, no? If the IRS can mail every single American their stimulus check and succeed, this is almost guaranteed to succeed, as mail is not involved. "There would be so many protests against it. A person's weight is there own business. There first and last name should also be their own business to give out to whomever they choose." But don't you think the fate of the public is more important than some people being embarrassed? I'd rather save countless lives. It would be selfish to say that this is an invasion of privacy. "Some people might be so embarrassed that they would just stay inside alone all the time. Others might for eating disorders because they feel so terrible about their weight." It is to be expected. But it will help American society on a whole, and if we can help even one person, it's better than never passing the bill. The casualties will be worth the ultimate reward of a healthier and more prosperous society. "Overweight people already have enough problems going out in public and that is a good enough reason for a lot of them go lose weight, but adding a name tag with their weight won't change much for a lot of them if they are already okay going out in public." I suggest reading citation four. Public humiliation works. And it will change those who are going out in public, as they now have a badge of shame. It's like the government is telling everyone who looks at them that they are fat and unhealthy. Overall, good effort, Con.

Pro concedes my Contention 1, that making sand less dense will not cause fat people to sink. Pro does not dispute that it would be incredibly time consuming to convert all the world’s beaches into low density sand. It would also be very time consuming to bury fast food under all the world’s beaches. A much better solution is to shoot fatties with some sort of density altering ray gun so that they float away into outer space. This solution solves all of Pro’s problems and keeps are beaches free of exploded human meat. Pro claims exploding fat people will cause it to rain fast food. This will just tempt the bronze Adonii of the beaches into eating French fries and becoming fat themselves. Not only will Pro’s plan ruin beaches by covering them in half digested McDonalds, it will ruin the beautiful people who belong on beaches by making them exceedingly rotund.


Question: Is Overweight Condition Considered a Disease?

Obesity in America: Should we take action?

Absolutely, we need to take action, but it's our responsibility to motivate those affected to make changes. No one will spontaneously take the initiative; it's up to us, the community, to assist in combating obesity. We must work together to encourage healthier lifestyles and support those struggling with weight issues. It's a collective effort that requires our commitment and dedication.

I have two sizable issues at this point relating to the description of the subject heading. "The fat should be made to buy two seats on planes",, now I know that fat can be made, but can it be made to buy? ,I would say it can not be made to buy any more than it can be made to sell, I take it what you meant by that is "an overweight person"? , and my other point is (assuming my interpretation thus far is correct),,, "made to buy,,," again do you mean that an overweight person should purchase two seats and then arrange for them to be fitted into the plane sometime before traveling? , or do you mean pay for the use of two seats for means of comfort whilst traveling? , I'll opt for the later and choose to rephrase the heading by reason of clarification for the benefit of all concerned. "It should be made compulsory for overweight persons to pay for the use of two seats on air crafts when one seat is clearly inadequate and threatens to infringe on another passengers seating space and comfort". On refection, if you were to have offered in a loving Scottish manner, to exchange seating positions with the hungry gentleman, due to your newly acquired fear of isles (wink wink) you could have taken advantage of your new seating arrangement by promptly sitting down, drop the arm rest, and fasten yourself in before he had time to be re-seated, leaving the no doubt leggy stewardess to negotiate the impending problem of having to maneuver herself and trolley passed the slavering gent in the isle seat, whilst you are quite comfortably enjoying the spoils of a stationary 125 meals and a free barrow load of booze that can't progress beyond the underside of your nose, courtesy of the by this time panicking how many bellies? , But no,, you had one look at the guys face,which prompted this pie in the sky idea, that would not only cause further discomfort and anxiety to others, but would inconveniently involve the busy captain who was purposely trying to avoid stray sheep whilst making his way to the runway, which only resulted in you being allocated a second seat (at no extra cost) in full view of your co-passengers who were being freely entertained by watching your version of a disgruntled passenger whom had no idea of how to play a simple game of musical chairs when having the advantage of a no loose situation which offered a reward that superseded the cost of your airline ticket. Please don't get me wrong here, I know ï¿½250 is a lot of money, especially to someone who has an Aberdeen connection, people from that area of Scotland are famous for their lack of transactions when it comes to bank withdrawals, at times I'm convinced Ebenezer Scrooge fathered the entire population of the city. It was only the other day that I witnessed an Aberdonian offering a card dealer his Grandmother in exchange for a pair of pocket 10s, with a view to increasing his rather advantageous stack in an online game of poker, whilst at the time hiding behind the guise of ill mannered aviator, dressed in a naughty school boy outfit, I know it wasn't you because your far too pleasant a person. You must realise that the facility of checking any Airline seating policy was put in place long before you decided to fly away from the much loved sheep of Aberdeen, and into the gateway of a cattle market provided by London Heathrow. If you were to have taken a little time out and enquire about the seating policy of the airline in question, you would have had prior knowledge that the ticket purchased ( single economy (coach) class ) was little more than a lottery ticket, and you stood to loose out by being seated beside a well fed gent who had a tendency to spread his over sized frame beyond the bounds of his much sought after seat, I say "sought after" because the flight was a sell out, not because you had the brains to suggest a cunning swap, and the well rounded gents idea of a loosing ticket would include being seated beside someone who wants the plane to himself, but lacks the intellect to move into the best seat on the plane, and ends up with the second worst, by choice. I think your idea of a winning ticket, would comprise of having the whole plane to yourself, now I know at this point you will say "I only wanted the seat I paid to sit on", but if you look at the terms and conditions of your ticket, your guaranteed nothing more than what you got, sorry but I think you're aware of that. If only you would have put your comfort before the priority of your bank balance, and purchased an additional adjacent seat, then just maybe you would have left the nice gentleman stranded in the Aberdeen airport cafeteria, awaiting the next available flight, wishing he was a fat cat that could afford the extra expense of club class, whilst you in your glory being able to stretch out and contemplate if it "would be too bold as to request a woolly blanket and a hot water bottle from a member of the leggy cabin crew". sorry but you brought it on yourself, Imagine the scenario if the policy you suggest were to be implemented, Check In,, "sorry sir but your too fat to occupy only one seat", traveler, "No no, you're mistaken, it's pure muscle, I workout frequently". Check in, "well your wife's fat and needs a good workout, as well as an extra seat". 2ND traveler, "No no, I have a medical condition, it's an illness, and I'm a lot slimmer than I look". It just wouldn't work, the flight operator would face more law suits than I care to mention, I think there's enough trouble at airports without asking passengers to embarrass themselves by jumping on a set of scales, you started this debate and gave it as much thought as you did the subject heading. I know of a man who's built like a half bottle of Smirnoff, he weighs about three and a half tonne, uses airports every other day, gets wheeled through airports from taxi to taxi, can't even walk in his sleep, (maybe he was the guy sitting beside you) this person is unable to sit on a bus or train for hours at a time, now I know airline operators don't run as an ambulance service, but they do run a service, and this service accommodates him. But in the way you wish for the policy to be changed only suits the pocket, not peoples feelings, your point only provides for pockets,and selfishness not people with empty bank accounts due to eating disorders and feelings, so for me the debate votes are balanced on this point, this is the choice that faces every potential voter. Now I know there are people out there that are grossly overweight, and refuse to pay for extra seating, causing discomfort to fellow passengers,like yourself, and at the same time saving a few quid in the process, but you just can't go trying to separate them from the genuinely ill, it would cause no end of problems and hurt to take such a stance, do peoples feelings take second prize to money in this modern day society? .your side of the debate reminds me of A comic strip, Fatman and Robbin', yes robbing people of their dignity and self esteem. I'll hand it back over to you, but if you are a man with even an ounce of compassion, you would concede this debate, and put the unsavory incident down as an experience that opened your eyes to someone less fortunate than ourselves, I'm sure it's left a bitter taste in your mouth, but just spit it out and get on with enjoying your life. I look forward to the next round :)

Thyroxin facilitates weight loss. The thyroid gland produces and stores thyroxin. When the supply of thyroxin, in the thyroid, is sensed by its internal transducer to be getting low, it automatically produces more thyroxin. If thyroxin is squeezed from the thyroid gland, it goes into the blood stream and causes weight loss. The thyroid gland then produces more thyroxin in response to its emptiness, soon ready to be squeezed again. Care should be taken not to hurt the thyroid gland. Simple pressure will squeeze the thyroxin into the blood stream. It is said that if it is done over and over too much, this can cause a "thyroid storm", like a person with an over active thyroid. Performed carelessly, or abused, it can be unhealthy. But this is not the only reason this knowledge is suppressed. That area, known as the "vishudha chakra" in yoga, is heavily wired with muscarinic parasympathetic neurons, whose stimulation, called "kundalini" in yoga, will wake up the brain more than the usual 10% brain use, even like LSD, which works by blocking the inhibitory neurons thereby allowing more than 10% brain use, whereas, muscarinic nervous system stimulation works by overriding the inhibitory neurons. The psychedelic drug muscarine doesn't even pass the blood brain barrier. It also works by exciting the muscarinic nervous system; but, it excites the whole parasympathetic nervous system, causing undesirably over active bowels, etc., so it isn't popular in very civilized cultures. Now, we can see another reason why this very effective, and easy, weight loss secret is suppressed. For example, a very politically powerful mystical organization kept, suggestive to them, blue candy from the market to protect their supreme grand secret, vagal stimulation. Most of the twenty-five million Americans who were committed to the mental hospital gulags in the Twentieth century were committed for knowing too much about their own bodies, the power of vagal stimulation. To prevent this human rights abuse from cracking down again, this secret must be spread. This needed further explanation for other audiences, and, this was the further explanation: The vagus nerve runs from the brain, out and down through the naso-pharynx, and down the throat, down into the body. It has branches around the lungs, heart, digestive system, and then down there. It is called the muscainic nervous system, for, if it is stimulated enough it wakes up the brain beyond the normal 10% use, like the hallucinogenic drug muscarine. Here is more information about it: "Waterboarding has replaced LSD for the Clockwork Orange treatment. The public must be informed that waterboarding causes much more than some physical discomfort from drowning and smothering. It stimulates the vagus nerve so much that it puts its victims into what Dr. Stanislav Grof calls "perinatal matrix three". In perinatal matrix three, one body switches backward and forward in time into every person that has been seen. The victims are first forced to see films of people in torment. Then, from enough vagal stimulation the victim body switches into each and every victim, one by one, backward and forward in time, to experience them all, and suffers their suffering as real as life. The scientific discovery of quantum physicist Dr. Hugh Everett, of a probability timeline for every possibility, does show that one does actually body switch in real victims by the Clockwork Orange treatment, caused by LSD, or waterboarding. The TV's in the cells of victims are not a luxury. These TV's are used to show horrible torments which the prisoner will soon suffer by the Clockwork Orange treatment. Crucifixion does the same thing. In ancient times initiation into the Sacred Mysteries was caused by vagal stimulation like this. In the "Aenied" the Witch of Averness said, "You cannot enter the Underworld (better known as Hell) without the Golden Bough (the vagus nerve). Vivasection in those days revealed that the vagus nerve looked like a "golden bough". Dr. Stanislav Grof revealed that Baptism was originally like waterboarding. The Baptism of such waterboarding was used for vagal stimulation by many repositories of the Sacred Mysteries, like the Knights of Bath. The name Baphomet means the Baptism of Wisdom, and, the devil Baphomet gives the gesture "as below so above", referring to human physiology. Yet, this is the most suppressed secret in the world. That's THEIR Supreme Grand Secret. Vagal stimulation overrides the inhibitory neurons in the brain, waking up the brain beyond it's normal 10% brain use. LSD does the same thing by blocking seratonin, the neurotransmitter of those inhibitory neurons that normally keep the brain down to 10% brain use. When the Soviet Union found out that the "lodge" WAS violating human rights to suppress this knowledge of the human body, Dr. Stanislav Grof came from Prague, Czechoslovakia, and established Grof Transpersonal, http://www.holotropic.com... where sufficient vagal stimulation is accomplished by "holotropic breathing". The "lodge" heeded the warnings of national security by not suppressing them. And, the "hive" theory of network engineering was declared, that, knowledge is sequestered in groups and goes nowhere. Then, the Iron Curtain fell. They had violated the noninterference treaty. Back in the old Iron Curtain countries shamans' disease was public knowledge. The people were allowed to know that scar tissue in the parasympathetic (muscarinic) nervous system woke up the brain, beyond the normal 10% brain use. But, here, behind the "Plastic Curtain", people with shamans' disease were condemned to the mental hospital gulags, invented by Benjamin Franklin for his "lodge", and tagged schizophrenic. Schizophrenia itself is caused by the growth of too many axons and dendrites between the brain neurons, caused by a gene called DISC1, which also wakes up the brain beyond the normal 10% brain use. But also, anyone caught knowing this Grand Secret was tagged schizophrenic, locked up in the mental hospital gulags, and tortured with dopamine blockers and shock treatments. The "lodge" was so paranoid about its Grand Secret that no one could get blue candy until the Twenty-First Century. The availability of blue candy was probably made possible by the writings of Mike O'Dan the Snakeman, from 1971 through to the Twenty-First Century, by pointing out this gap, conspicuous by set theory, and the reason for it. The "lodge" is the greatest threat to the American way today, and have been since 1995 when they attempted to remove our human rights by a constitutional convention. Recently, they have even been trying to put America under an Islamic governmemnt. They are sneaking Sharia Law into our court systems now. They are also trying to force changes that would eliminate our Bill of Rights by destroying the economy. If you want to continue enjoying your American liberties, I suggest that you spread this secret material, for you, too, now know too much." Pressing on the thyroid gland squeezes thyroxin into the body causing weight loss. The thyroid gland soon fills with thyroxin again to be press again, causing more weight loss, on and on. It just looks like strangulation, blue candy stains the lips blue, and there can be much vagal stimulation done there with the "vishudha chakra", thus the "lodge" even used their un-Constitutional influence to keep blue candy off the market. The chakras of yoga are plexuses of the muscarinic nervous system, not "spiritual wheels of light along the spine". People who want to take more advanced yoga must sign a contract of secrecy before they are told the truth about the chakras. And, the yoga instructors are also bound by contracts of secrecy. I never singed any contract of secrecy. A homeless banished "lodge" member told my buddy and I all the secrets in 1959. I put them all in a term paper in 1962, got a 98% for it, graduated with honors, and joined the Army. The instructor of that class had sold that term paper in the term paper black market, the wrong people read it, detectives were sent out to hunt me down, and they got me "over a barrel" in the Army. I was given the "Clockwork Orange" treatment by large doses of LSD, which puts you in the real Hell. And later threatened that they would put me in Hell permanently is I ever revealed the secrets again. They didn't offer me membership. I also swore an oath to defend the Constitution, and I have been spreading the secret ever since, as a very angry fugitive.

I say that fat people live longer than skinny people. You may start.

I am not a fat shamer. I have created this debate because I seek someone to challenge my view, that it is acceptable to fat shame women. I am aware that most people do not approve of fat shaming, however my opponent must show why it is not okay to fat shame womenStructure:R1 = Acceptance/position only! R2 - R4 = Arguments and counter argumentsR5 = Conclusion RulesNo forfeitingAlso Burden of proof is sharedGood Luck Con!

Though America is dealing with overweight issues, not all of these issues are directly apparent with the entire N.C. State student body. Furthermore, Students enter college between the general ages of 17-19 and are defined by society as adults. Therefore as adults, if obesity is a problem for any students they should be able to seek help that is necessary or take a PE course at their will. And other students are welcomed also to take PE courses, but should be at the same time trusted as adults to make rational decisions pertaining to their health needs and desires. If necessary, information can be easily obtained through other resources as well, such as online or books if necessary. With response to the PE course requirements benefiting students as a whole, how is this relevant if N.C. State has never not required PE courses. How does the administration know that students would not seek out Physical Education courses without requirement, knowing that it benefits students as a whole. Students who are taking advantage of the Carmichael Gym and other perks that are offered would enroll themselves in a PE course, knowing that it helps to provide them a place to work out. Therefore, students who really care for the workout area and programs would partake enrollment, and those students who do not care for the facility and its benefits can put their time into another course. Physical Activity may have these effects, but the problem here is a time constraint. People who want to work out daily are going to work out with or without the course requirement, therefore PE courses are taking away from time they could allot for a more brain stimulating course. For other students who may not care as much about working out, they may not be able to find a PE course that works with their schedule; therefore, they are forced to sacrifice more important courses to fit PE into their day. My roommate had to take a PE course, which did not interest her because of the inconvenient time and graduation plans. She would seem aggravated both before and after class because she believed it was not the most efficient way to spend her day. So, clearly although exercise helps relieve stress, if you are not willing to fully engage in activity to relieve your stress there will be nothing to gain, and therefore, the PE course will render itself unnecessary.

Your most recent argument is a futile attempt to blame all of societies issues upon violent video games which simply is not true. Statistically speaking violence in people who play and do not play violent video games are the same hence violent games cannot be the attributing factor in violent behavior. This scapegoating is an simple attempt to put all of the blame of violent acts merely upon games that people play but let me tell you one thing what about all of the other contributing factors such as how hey are treated by others, how they are raised, and even medical history upon the family could shed some light upon the source of violent behaviors. Plus with your argument we would also have to say that the News is bad for the violence depicted as well as many textbooks explaining human history. Also I would like to point out the fact tat if you want to be an effective killer a certain amount of physical fitness is required (this will tie into my next paragraph). There is also a matter of parents ability to control what types of games their children play but more on this later. http://www.geek.com... http://www.theregister.co.uk... http://www.spiritus-temporis.com... http://usmilitary.about.com... http://www.military.com... http://www.esrb.org... To blame obesity entirely upon video games is also an example of scapegoating for you have to account for other lifestyle factors as well such as: the persons general diet, stress levels, family history, and type of job you also need to include the parental figures as well for they often times play a major role in a persons lifestyle. To say that an fat person will likely grow up and kill a bunch of people is also a farce due to the fact an effective killing machine is an fit killing machine. Also think of how many fat people that are considered to be cool and highly respected in the modern culture of the U.S.A.. Also remember that a person cannot simply be judged by their appearance for many fit people are bad people in accordance to their behavior (take Hitler for instance he was fit physically and had no video games yet committed a great atrocity against mankind). http://www.cdc.gov... http://www.womenfitness.net... http://blog.toptentopten.com... http://www.bbwsanctuary.com... http://listverse.com... http://listverse.com... http://usmilitary.about.com... The level of physical fitness one has does not make them any better or worse when it comes to terms of behavior and health. Many physically fit people have committed mass murders and never had a video game to show them these behaviors. Since the birth of competing civilizations man has raped, pillaged, and slaughtered his neighbors and in our 5000 year history of having civilization we have only seen video games appear about 52 years ago so how does your argument stand up that video games are in essence "the seed" of violence in today's society. I would also like to point out the fact that you can be fat and healthy so it is pointless to say that only the physically fit are the only people who are healthy. I would also like to point out that simply being physically fit does not mean you are any healthier for often times physically fit people suffer from medical ailments. http://www.independent.co.uk... http://www.ecotao.com... http://www.bnl.gov... http://www.serge411.com... http://www.time.com... http://helpguide.org... http://www.newsweek.com... http://content.bandzoogle.com... http://www.independent.co.uk... I say that video games are not the major problem it is the lack of people wanting to look at other key factors in the health of citizens of the U.S.A.. We must stop scapegoating and take initiative of the true basis of health and behavior problems in our great nation. http://www.helium.com... http://www.suite101.com... http://remember.org... http://www.actionbioscience.org... http://helpguide.org... http://www.sixwise.com... http://www.womenshealth.gov... http://www.health.ny.gov... http://www.opposingviews.com...

When you try to urge an alcoholic to stop drinking how well does it work? when you want a drug addict to go to rehab how many times do they comply? The point is they have to want the change they have to take the first step then we can come in. Obese people have to do something first before we can help. Thank you.

I will begin by addressing my opponents opening argument and I will then move on to refuting their rebuttals of my argument. 1) My opponent spends much of her space illustrating the economic and public health concerns over obesity. I essentially agree with them on the points about the issue but I wholeheartedly disagree with the solution they proposed. 2) My opponents definition of the "fat tax" is perfect because it illustrates how vague and arbitrary the concept would have to be. "A form of sin tax implemented on unhealthy foods that are linked to obesity. " Many foods with great health benefits could be linked to obesity. Almost any food eaten in oversized portions can be linked to obesity. My point is that no line can be drawn without slippery logic. How much fat is unhealthy? How much sugar or salt is unhealthy? There are far too many factors to living a healthy life and too many variables that change these values from person to person for a blanket standard to fit everyone. This goes back to my argument about school lunches. Those standards were based on the dietary recommendations for sedentary adult woman. At the time, I was a growing teenager male in 4 sports and in a weight training class. Those guidelines forced my school to cut portion sizes which left me hungry every day (I relied on free lunch because I came from a low income family). This was not healthy for me even though I was choosing a healthier lifestyle than a sedentary adult woman. 3) My opponent also makes reference to the fact that since our country offers medical subsidies the government has a right to make decisions in regards to their health. This is a dangerously authoritarian approach. The purpose of our government is not to force people into health, work, or any other good thing in exchange for medical benefits. That is called slavery. Our government should instead be focused on ensuring that people have access to the tools to build a healthy/happy life for themselves as they see fit. If they choose otherwise, that is their right and should not be subject to anyone else's opinions. On to refuting Pro's rebuttals. I) There are no objectively unhealthy foods- My opponents definition of unhealthy is itself subjective, "food that is not REGARDED as being conducive to health". Unless my opponent can give specific nutritional guidelines (like # of calories/fat/salt/, then unhealthy is a subjective term. I used the McDonald's example to prove that even though much of society considers McDonald's food as unhealthy, the CEO was able to become healthier while eating nothing but that food. He did this through moderation, variety, and exercise. If I am biased towards believing I can lose weight by sitting on the couch more that does not work. His bias does not disprove his real, verified results. II) Exacerbates crony capitalist corruption- My opponent does not address this point which means I must assume Pro has accepted the burdens of these harms. III) Discriminatory and regressive- In this rebuttal my opponent supports glaringly slippery logic. "Choice. .. is only effective when individuals make choices that do not harm themselves. " Essentially this statement claims that the government has power to determine for individuals what will lead them to live the happiest/healthiest possible life. Can we make exercise mandatory? Can we make people shower everyday? At what point do people have power over their bodies if this is the standard? My opponent also speaks to the supposed economic benefit to individuals. So the government should decide what we do with our money too? Why not elect a nutritionist/personal financier our dictator? IV) Fails to create a healthier society- My opponent didn't refute my points here except to bring up an unspecified EU report. This is not sourced and to use my opponents argument here, the EU "is subject to bias". V) Not the governments right- See 3 and III.

"And I know you said we aren't debating with diseases and stuff" Then why bring it up? I clearly stated in my opening statement that we are not debating about diseases and such, but food consumption. Therefore, for everything mentioned about diseases, I will call it out as invalid. "And how can kids play outside when they have homework!?!?!?!?!" How do people do extra curricular activites? Homework, on average, takes up thirty minutes to two hours for an elementary school, and perhaps one hour to two hours for gifted. Most schools release children from school around 3:00. This leaves them with four hours at the LEAST with the maximum amount of homework. "And how can parents urge their kids to play outside or whatever when their busy buying food thats not good for their kids as you previously stated!!!!" Parents do not spend their lives in grocery stores; they could at least mention excersize OR allow them to do extracurricular activities after school. However, when parents notice that their child is obese, they should at least try to change their lifestyle a bit, because a family's lifestyle really does make a difference for a child's weight. Who directs the family's way of life? The parents. "Where I go to school there is alot to be tackled" Based on your profile, it says that you are in highschool. Highschool is VERY different than elementary school in the amount of work and such people get. Parents are at fault for their child's obesity because they buy the food. They are in charge of what their children do, and they lead the lifestyle of their children. Children need excerize and healthy food. Parents are responsible for both areas. Lack of these things will cause obesity. Parents have control over this, and can stop it. Children's schools are not guilty, because the majority are changing their menu to stop the rapid growth rate of obesity. Fast food places do hold a bit of the blame, but like my opponent has said before, "its not like they're shoving food down the kid's throats". My opponent has failed to prove any clear points as to why parents should NOT be blamed for obesity; he has only provided counter-arguments. Hopefully he will state many points in the final round.

I realize you didn't bring up eating disorders. I realize you didn't' bring up body image throughout the ages and what was considered beautiful. I was simply suggesting those to illustrate the plurality of possibilities that an obese individual could have in their resentment. You can't just point the finger to envy and count it off that way. Ad the thing is you agreed with me. You said that a person has a right to express their opinion. In that line of thinking, I see nothing wrong with the gentleman you spoke of who talked about wanting skinny people to go to hell. It's his opinion. It doesn't matter whether or not I agree. it doesn't matter what emotions it actually evokes in me, whether it be anger, pity, or indifferences. It's his opinion. He has the right to express it. Therefore, you must negate this resolution.