Fat People Lie

This blog is dedicated to exposing the dangers of bariatric surgery and the lies of the weight loss surgeons and their loathsome industry.

Just how bad is obesity? It is the second or third leading cause of preventable death killing around 300,000 Americans each year and that may sound bad but doctor blunders alone kill at least that many and the medical industry kills well over a million Americans each year and make a huge fortune in the process.... More on this in another post.

What this blog is also intended to do is to offer alternatives to the butchery that is weight loss surgery. So then, if you are fat and you can't handle being fat and feel as though paying a hacker to butcher you is your only option I offer you some help and tough love from health expert CG Brady.

Many of you have tried diets but you probably didn't try hard and you didn't work smart. Your diet didn't fail. You failed and you failed because you have fattitude. Most fat men will grudgingly admit thet they are gluttons. Women tend to lie about that and a whole lot of other things.


As part of CG's research he went on to a diet forum that was primarily Atkins. The administrator was an angry fat girl -- talk about the blind leading the blind.

He posted a study by Temple University that showed who "high self esteem" makes and keeps women fat.

Proof That High Self-Esteem Keeps You Fat by CG Brady

How High Self-Esteem Keeps You Fat


A new study sheds light on why some women find it difficult to lose weight. When obese women have positive self-image, 1 in 5 will choose a silhouette of an obese woman as being at her “ideal” body weight.


This study also supports other research that has shown that fat people tend to have fat friends. Alcoholics or drug addicts who are overcoming addiction are taught to get rid of the friends that enable their dangerous behaviors.

Maybe a person on a diet needs to do the same?


In research published in the May issue of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temple researchers studied the body image perceptions of 81 underweight, normal weight, overweight or obese women in the North Philadelphia area and found that as their body mass index (BMI) increased, two-thirds of the women still felt they were at an ideal body size.
n research published in the May issue of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Temple researchers studied the body image perceptions of 81 underweight, normal weight, overweight or obese women in the North Philadelphia area and found that as their body mass index (BMI) increased, two-thirds of the women still felt they were at an ideal body size.


"So the question for doctors then becomes, 'How can we effectively treat our overweight and obese patients, when they don't feel they're in harm's way?'" said study researcher Marisa Rose, M.D., assistant professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences in the Temple University School of Medicine. "It stresses a need for culturally sensitive education for this population."


All participants were measured for height and weight and completed an anonymous survey to determine their self-perceived, current and ideal body sizes. Each woman was then shown an illustration of different-sized women that correlated with increasing BMIs, and were asked which size they felt they were at currently, and what their ideal would be.


While most of the participants selected illustrations of women in the normal to overweight range, about 20 percent of the obese women selected an overweight or obese silhouette as their ideal body shape. Further, 68 percent (15 out 22) of overweight participants and 84 percent (26 of 31) of obese women underestimated their current BMI. African-American and Hispanic women had significantly underestimated their current body size, while the white women overestimated.
Rose and her fellow researchers say this is the first study to evaluate body image discrepancy specifically in the inner-city population of women seeking gynecologic care.


"For this group, gynecologists often serve as the primary care provider as well," said Rose. "As more women become obese and overweight, it becomes critical for gynecologists to know how to talk to their patients about the adverse effects of obesity."
The researchers say that their next course of action is to determine from a more diverse population whether the trend of women incorrectly perceiving their body size extends to most underweight, overweight and obese women or whether the trend is specific to the inner-city population.
"Informing our patients about the dangers of obesity, even when they feel they're not at risk, can help empower them to change their lifestyles and lead healthier lives," said Rose.

Other authors on the study were: Sushma Potti, M.D.; Marina Milli, M.D.; Stacey Jeronis, M.D.; and John P. Gaughan, Ph.D of Temple University School of medicine.

The first response came from a paranoid Michael B:

So the article appears to be indicating that the problem stems from not high self esteem, but lack of recognition that one is obese or at an unhealthy weight.

I don't see crushing a patent's self esteem as the solution they offer. Instead, they indicate that "it becomes critical for gynecologists to know how to talk to their patients about the adverse effects of obesity." 

Moreover, you might take note of another point made in the article, "It stresses a need for culturally sensitive education for this population." Basically, the audience will heed your advice and be more receptive you your message, if you approach them from a non-judgmental position.  

 My Response:

Here are my comments on the above article.

It is scientifically valid.

It was done by some very bright people at a very good university

There are other studies and research than backs up Temple's findings findings including an exhaustive survey of several thousand completed and graded MMPI indices and other psychometric tests.

Casual observation of the obese reveals much of what this experiment revealed. Other researchers have found that if fat people did not have higher self esteem than the general population then they would lack the psychological fortitude to be seen in public.

I a private message I told the admin here that it is my belief that fat people have what is commonly referred to as high self-esteem. I told him if he wanted to see "low self esteem" all he need do is observe an anorexic. The idea that fat people have low self-esteem is a logical fallacy. Now the "fat people have low self-esteem" myth has been busted.

At this point I will bid you all a fond adieu. If you would like me to explain why the obese develop higher self esteem than the general population then simply respond to this thread.

Another liar responds:

I'm not sure your game. If it's trolling then you're doing a good job because you're getting a lot of responses. If you're trying to sell people on your method or your intelligence then misinterpreting a study might not be the best way to go about it. First of all proof is almost impossible, second of all the proof that you find is different than what the researchers appear to be studying.

Self Esteem /= to body image. There is no evidence that the people in the study are fatter because of their body image. Although I'd agree it's possible. And there's no evidence that being happy with your weight keeps you fatter than someone who is unhappy with their weight. Considering studies that show dieting results in higher overall weight on average it might have the opposite outcome. Basically the problem is you're taking a study and simplifying it way too much for it to remain useful. 

I'd tend to agree with Michael that this study is probably most helpful in providing a different way to try and tackle the obesity problem. Not for making absolute truths. 

EDIT: I find it a bit hard to believe that a research scientist would have such difficulty understanding the research process. So I'd have to assume you're either trolling or making up false titles. 

Followed by another sneaky liar:

Interesting article, and I think I get what they are saying. But a sample size of 81 hardly “proves” anything… depending on the variables the were using the data in such a small sample is prone to being skewed by a few outliers. My inner nerd is curious to see their raw data.

Anecdotally (which doesn’t prove anything either). I don’t know any obese women that feel good about their bodies. I knew a few that have accepted their bodies, but I wouldn’t say they have a very positive body image. I do know some obese men that like their bodies. Even though they have high self esteem, they still talk about needing to lose weight for health reasons. It would be interesting to see a similar study with male participants. 

The main point of the article makes sense, though, that if you are happy with your physique you are less likely to want to change it. I don’t think you are necessarily getting the same conclusions as the authors stated. You seem to have an agenda, which I am still not understanding… 

Posting this article, though, still makes me think that maybe you are coming for the perspective of anti-fat acceptance. I mentioned in a previous thread that was locked that this website doesn’t promote fat acceptance. We are all striving to lose weight and be healthy. So, again, we may not be the audience you think we are. (I hate to generalize with a “we” like that… I don’t speak for everyone of course. That is just my assessment of this website based on my first month of being a member here.) 

Are you really here for purely altruistic purposes? Or are you selling your services? A book? Are you just bored and you like to post on forums? What up? 

Of course… since you bid us “a fond adieu”, I assume you are done doing whatever it you wanted to do here. Good luck being a “research scientist”.

My response:

Dr Albert Ellis, father of Rational Emotive Therapy pretty much proved that this thing we call self esteem is a very dangerous thing. Ellis contended that it was because self-esteem is conditional. I agree with that but I take it a few steps further. The idea of self esteem is a nebulous concept at best. It is not really measurable. For instance an Amish person may be perfectly well adjusted but the Amish are a humble people who are taught humility. Someone may see that as "low self-esteem". I see it as humility. Humility is one of the heavenly virtues.

As to culture; if you were to look at the obesity maps you will see that the Bible belt leads the country in obesity. If you examine what these people believe you will find that they believe that grace or being born again assure them a place in heaven. In a sense they think they are better than everyone else. They lack humility. They are also the fattest people on earth. They ignore the Biblical warnings about excess as they drive their SUVs and gobble down everything in sight at there church picnics.

As to culture; Americans are the fattest people on earth. We are a culture of excess and pride. The humble and frugal Japanese have an obesity rate of 3.2% whereas the prideful and wasteful Americans have an obesity rate of over 30% according to this site Obesity statistics - countries compared - NationMaster

I don't see how being "sensitive" to a destructive cultural behavior is going to make people do the right thing. Take your average over weight Southerner. He needs to stop behaving like a Southerner and Americans as a whole need to stop behaving like the greedy professional consumers they have become. We like to blame fast food and large portions but they fact is the companies who offer fast food and obscenely large portions are merely giving the consumer what he wants. Think about it. If McDonald when back to its 1970's portion sizes they would be out of business in a few months.

Americans did not get fat by being frugal, humble, or responsible. Americans got fat by being prideful, irresponsible and gluttonous about everything. That is why by 2020 America will become disabled by obesity. You don't want to hear it but is is the entire truth.

I spit in their soup.

Liar MichaelB Responds again:

Here is how this piggy lies:

My main thought was just that it's a pretty rough generalization to say that all obese people "suffer" from high self-esteem. Some may have a positive body image, but that's not necessarily the situation with everyone.

Nobody has said ALL fat people suffer from high self esteem/egoism. See how they lie?


Just as everyone's body loses weight a little differently, everyone's situation in life is a little different. Our experiences, our history, our past has shaped us. And even though we may all be obese as a group, we may have gotten here via very different paths and for very different reasons. 

Sorry liar, you all got fat the same way. You ALL ate irresponsibly!

My response in general: 

A couple of points I need to correct. There are other studies that back the Temple study. Several years ago a survey of the MMPI showed the same thing. ie fat people have high self-esteem

I am anti-fat acceptance. What is fat acceptance? When a spouse goes from a size 6 to an 8 and does nothing about it, that is a form of fat acceptance. When that spouse reaches 250 pound and her hubby complains and her response is, "If you loved me you would accept me for what I am" that is fat acceptance. If a parent allows their kids to eat unhealthy food that to is fat acceptance. The organized fat acceptance movement promotes obesity, misinformation, myths, bad health, and gluttony and the call it HAES Health At Every Size.

If you are losing weight in a sense you are a recovering fat acceptor. I am lean because I find for myself being fat is completely unacceptable. Is it unacceptable to me that people are fat? I suppose it is.

Ahhhh Altruism. I am here for insight and to help. I have nothing to sell and I even offered to help one member here free of charge. I will not accept paying clients from this site unless the admin wants me to.

More Altruism: One thing that helps my clients turn the corner is when I ask them for noble or unselfish reasons for why hey want to regain good health. I start out asking them why the want to regain good health and so far none of them have given and altruistic reason. When I gently force the issue they really have to give it some thought and they struggle to come up with some. When I ask them why they want to lose weight the answers are right on the tip of their tongue and they always start with I and end with me. I don't think selfish reasons should be on the tips of their tongues or in the forefront of their motivation to take the steps required to get healthy.

What I do is lead clients to the right information and help them apply it. It is actually quite easy. I have had a lot of success and I continue to hone my skills. I hope someday that my protocols are used everywhere. I think you will agree that everything tried so far has not worked. People who continue my program usually get results in 6 to 12 sessions. If they don't get results I will not accept payment. If they do get results I will not accept payment until they are close to or at their goal. They pay me what they think my services are worth. That may not be altruism but it's pretty damn close.

Again, do not PM me for contact info. I will not post any contact info so don't ask. Your admin has the info. If you wish to contact me ask him for it. I am not here to drum up business. I am here to discuss obesity its cause and it cure.

My more specific response: 

It is not a generalization but it is a fact that most obese people have higher slef esteem people at low or healthy weights. Michael Jackson suffered from horribly low self esteem and he starved himself to death while the people around him bled him t\dry.

For most people junk food its pleasures are a greater payoff than good health and an attractive body. People get fat for most of the same reasons. There is no mystery as to why they chronically eat too many calories. Believe me, you guys are not that special. Food and its pleasures mean more to most people than good health, attractiveness, personal and social responsibility. That is a tough pill to swallow but it is the case. 

MamaPig chimes in with a lie fest.

Your post made it sound like I've pm'ed you for contact information. I've never done that, nor am I interested in doing that. Perhaps that was directed at another member?

I am trying to assume that you are coming from a good place and that you aren't simply here to get some twisted jollies. I want you to be this guy  and not this guy  ... but right now you are this guy . Oh, I love emoticons.
 

I don't think people here disagree with the basics of what you are saying (well... most of the basics). We all know that we got fat eating too much and exercising too little. As far as I can see, most of us are remedying the problem by eating a reduced calorie diet and exercising.

I think the advice you have given regarding weight loss (at least that which I can tease out from your posts) is really pretty much in line with what everyone here seems to already know and already be acting on. I think you are just losing people on your tough love (?) delivery. 

And... I just have to ask. You don't have to answer, because it isn't any of my business. But... in a couple of posts now you have stated that you dislike fat people. Why have you gone into a business where fat people are your clients? Same reason someone who hates teenagers becomes a juvenile corrections officer?

My response: 

You seem to be reading things that are not there. First please show me where I said or even implied that you PM'd me. You are welcome to PM me even though you called me an asshole.

Second show me where I said or even implied that I dislike fat people.

You speak of tough love. I would not characterize what I do as being tough love. It may be an act love or just a little bit of human decency ie showing people how not to commit suicide with food. My approach challenges irrational thinking, statements and behaviors. Regarding their obesity fat people often engage in irrational thinking. Fat people often make irrational statements and for sure their behaviors regarding how they feed and care for themselves are irrational. A rational person would not chronically indulge in caloric poisoning. That is what they do.

Part of the reason I am effective is because of the language I choose. I don't mince words because for something as important as this you can't mince words. Do you think I want to see you fail and get sick and die before your time?

Are you going to reject the truth of what I am saying because you don't like my style? I am not going to salve you or anyone else. I tell it like it is. People today are not used to that. If you had cancer and there was a good 40% that treatment would save your life would you want your doctor to keep that information from you for fear of upsetting you?

I have a pretty good idea as to why you are an over eater and how you can stop. If you would like to discuss it let me know. We can do it in this thread if you like.

More deception from Monique:

There are so many problems with the posts made by this asshole I don't think it's worth my time to address them all. But as MichaelB and MamaPig have pointed out: "proof" is FAR too strong a word for a group of 81 women in which ONLY 20% of the ONLY 31 obese women -- which makes 6 women -- identified EITHER the overweight OR the obese silhouette as ideal. Actually it makes 6.2 women, which means the percentages were rounded up! You are saying that if SIX WOMEN who are obese don't recognize the current, medically-preferred body type you can generalize about all obese people? Not to mention that body-image and self-esteem are completely different issues!

So the solution in your mind is to assume that all obese people must have overly high self esteem, even though the vast majority -- 80 percent! -- did NOT think they had the ideal body. And you feel the best way to counteract that is to be insensitive? I do not think you have a "style." I think what you are calling honesty is oversimplification and a lack of empathy or humanity. And your "language" would be more effective if you bothered to do some basic copy editing on your posts. I wish your "adieu" had been genuine! 

My response:

You may want to read a bit more carefully.

Where did I say fat people have OVERLY high self esteem? If you had read what I had written you would see that I never said that. If you had read with a normal amount of reading comprehension you would know by now that I think self esteem is pretty much a myth. What fat people have IMO is called egoism. True self esteem is conditional. Egoism isn't.

What that study really proves is that fat and obese are now the new normal.

As to the adieu you need to go back and read what I wrote and you need to stop lying.

The article that admin posted that I wrote was ALTERED and posted on this site Bigger Fatter Blog The owner of this site is a member of what they call the new fat acceptance. These people are militantly anti diet. There are about 400+ fat acceptance websites in something they call the fatosphere. They come to diet forums and use a sophisticated disinformation technique. Most of the FA blogs are highly censored but Bigger Fatter isn't.

Here is the BFB mission statement. There are about 6 sites similar to BFB that I know of.

Bigger Fatter Blog 

This is the next phase in fat acceptance. The days of justifying our fatness by saying we have a mysterious genetic or metabolic disorder are over. We now freely admit and embrace what the fat haters would call gluttony. We fatlings are no longer apologists for our size nor our greedy gluttony. We are fat because we eat huge amounts of food and we like it. If you don't like it get used to it because fat people are now the overwhelming majority.


BFB is a male run FA site. 99% of the FA sites are female run and most FA members are female. The FA culture is very very sick. They indulge in strange sexual fetishes such as feederism and crushing. They are not particularly fond of fat men but they encourage men called fat admirers to have sex with them. Fat Bastard and Proud FA are the owners of the site and regulars at fat conventions that are pretty much orgies of food and sex. They started their site because they think men are treated badly by fat women and they think the current fat acceptance is dishonest. I agree with them on that. They are one of many sites who promote gormandizing and excess. They see fat people as the new royalty. They really dislike me and they try to prank and monkey wrench people like me MeMe Roth. 

Liar Monique lies:

So what's your point, and how is that relevant to our site? The version of your article you provided had no differences I could determine besides the addition of comments in italics, which the Admin explained he had left out. And you already explained the context in another thread, which I still don't think excuses your description of a client as a hooked fish or the use of insulting terms like "gluttony" and "laziness" in regards to the people this forum is intended to help.

I don't care about the Fat Acceptance movement particularly and I CERTAINLY don't care about your feelings about it. Why do you feel the need to research and then share the sexual fetishes of a group you hate? I don't care what consenting adults do in their bedrooms. Why would you care if other people like to have sex with women you find unattractive? It sounds like sour grapes to me! Anyway that's not what this site is about. This site is about how to get healthier when you're obese. 
"They really dislike me and they try to prank and monkey wrench people like me and MeMe Roth."

From this comment I suspect you are just here to vent about how this other forum doesn't like you. I also suspect you might be a 12-year-old. Frankly I can see why they don't like you if you continually post obnoxious and inaccurate information and then ignore requests for clarification. Why don't you take your own advice and stop feeling sorry for yourself about people not liking you? Now you know how you make fat people feel!

My response: 

It is relevant because the statements they, you and others attributed to me came from that site. I explained the context and you still tried to say they were my words. You are pissed because I busted you on your I barely eat BS using the laws of physics as undeniable proof. You got owned and you got busted and now you are lying.

Obnoxious is in the eye of the beholder but inaccurate is not. You cannot find one thing I said that is inaccurate. Again, stop lying.

I don't know how fat people feel but I do know how they often behave.

I love it when scumbags don't like me. It validates me. Do you like me.

As to the sick and dangerous practices of the fat acceptors goes, of course you don't care about it. I on the other hand have a strong sense of personal and social responsibility so the idea of feeding someone to purposely make them gain weight to morbidly obese proportions is a concern of mine as many of these people have children. Then again I am not so self absorbed that I don't consider the fate of others. Unlike YOU I don't turn a blind eye to such atrocities.

Hooked fish? I never said that. STOP LYING!

Here is a definition of gluttony :Excess in eating or drinking. How is that insulting? You are really really obese. Are you saying that an excess in eating and drinking didn't make you fat and doesn't keep you fat?

If someone were to say accuse you of gluttony what could you say to prove them wrong? You do eat to excess. So why are you not a glutton? Do you prefer the term over eater? Gormandizer?

Lazy? Tell me why this doesn't apply to you. You are what the fat acceptors would call super sized. You have been that way for quite sometime. RIGHT? You were not born weighing nearly 350 pounds. You know what to to to not be fat but obviously you didn't do it. Would you call that ambitious?

If someone were to say that behavior was that of a lazy person and that in fact you were lazy why would they be wrong? When it comes to your weight tell me why your behavior has not been that of a lazy person.

Tell me why other obese people are not lazy and gluttonous. You accused me of calling fat people lazy gluttons. I did not even call them lazy gluttons. Would you prefer languid over-indulgers? How about shiftless gormands? Perhaps slothful over eaters? Do any of these descriptions fit? If not what does fit people who knowingly eat too much and do nothing about it?

You ask why I am concerned about men having sex with obese women. As long as they don't get them pregnant. That would be a disaster. Fat women should NOT get pregnant. That is child abuse plain and simple!!  

Monique the angry glutton lies again: 

I don't want to address your presumptions about me because I don't want to get into personal attacks and name calling. I did that once before in frustration and I regret it because I now see you like that reaction. You want to be able to claim you're being bullied and censored and all that. But my problem with your posts is really what you are saying, not who you are.

Your assertion that having children while overweight is in and of itself child abuse is so completely unfounded I don't know how to respond. I would ask you to explain how excess weight on the part of the parents even affects parenting at all but I know you'll only ask more stupid rhetorical questions to try and distract us from your inability to clarify what you haven't fully considered. You would then have to defend the ridiculous position that people with known health risks should not have families because it is abusive to create children unless you are in perfect health. Wow, that would have a lot of civil rights implications! How do we determine who is healthy enough by your standards to reproduce? Maybe those unfit in your eyes should be sterilized? Or possibly you just think it is abusive to have children when not attractive to you personally? Does your sexual preference alone determine who may and may not reproduce? Why aren't men allowed to be attracted to obese women in your mind? Are women allowed to be attracted to obese men? Can obese men get non-obese women pregnant? 


NOTE: Obesity more than doubles the risk on many major birth defects and autism. 

Your moral issues with sex and reproduction are pretty complicated. I don't know if you have ever been in love or had sex yourself, but I suspect not. If you had you would know that in general orgies nowadays involve birth control.  

Note: I suspect that this liar has kids that are disabled up due to her obesity. 

All these people are obese. They are all looking for a way to not be fat yet still maintain their current gluttonous lifestyles. 

Health Care Acquired Infections in US Hospitals Remain at Epidemic Proportions

Based on voluntary reporting from 26 states over 2 MILLION American get a hospital acquired (HAI) infection and 200,000 of them die. The odds of you getting an HAI are now one in nine. Surgery makes the risk much higher. Bariatric surgery has a very high risk of killing you with an infection.

It's not surprising that the state with the filthiest hospitals and now laws protecting patients are mostly red states.

Find a retired nurse in her sixties or seventies and ask her about the number of hospital acquired infection that she was aware of when she first became a nurse. She will tell you that they were extremely rare. She will go on to tell you that they were not tolerated and that when they did occur the county health department tracked them down, asses got kicked and the problem got fixed. Back in her day HAIs were taken very seriously. Today hospital infections are routine and expected. Thirty years ago medicine was a profession. Today it's an industry. Forty years ago doctors were compassionate healers who honored their profession and their oath. Today they are LLC (Limited Liability Corporations)

Today there are companies like Kimberly-Clark and organizations like RID Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths who sell products and promote effective protocols to eradicate HAIs. The disinfecting products that Kimberly-Clark sells are far superior to what was available thirty years ago.Kimberly-Clark is aggressively publicizing the desperate need for infection control in American hospitals and hospitals worldwide.



Kimberly-Clark has launched a NOT ON MY WATCH a campaign that is aimed at educating doctors (good luck with that) and other health care workers on how to prevent Hospital Acquired infection. If you click this link you will find some very disturbing data that Kimberly-Clark is presenting to warn patients. It is the same data that your doctor and hospital would rather you not know.



Kimberly-Clark and RID are not the only ones working on behalf of patients in trying to educate hospitals and doctors on the importance basic hygiene. Johns Hopkins School of Public Health along with Consumers Union has issued effective protocol that hospitals ignore and doctors still ignore. The federal government does not now nor will it regulate health care. hat is and will continue to be left up to corrupt and weak state medical boards. Johns Hopkins is urging people to contact their state legislatures to ask hem to pass laws that will protect patients from these deadly pathogens that infest our hospitals and I am not just talking about doctors. If you go to this LINK you will find  who to write to in your state. Please take a few minutes to write to your state senator or assemblyman. They may have lost a loved one to the gross negligence of a hospital and may be inclined to do the right thing for the citizens of your state.

Kimberly-Clark and others are offering hospitals and health care facilities great tools and great advice for eradicating hospital borne infection but damn few hospitals are listening. It would be easy to blame the working stiffs who get treated like crap by their higher ups. Most hospital workers are scared shit less of management and if they were ordered to keep the hospital clean or else, the hospital would be clean and disease free.

According to Time Magazine In the U.S., hospital-acquired infections affect 1 in 10 patients,killing 90,000 of them each year and costing as much as $11 billion each year

Read more:http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1733748_1733754_1735344,00.html#ixzz0oujrz8ti

Stopping hospital infections is a no brainer. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Peter J. Pronovost is an intensive care specialist physician at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland.^[3] He is a Professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in the Departments of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, and Surgery, Professor of Health Policy and Management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public  Health, and is Medical Director for the Center for Innovation in Quality Patient Care.

He introduced an intensive care checklist protocol that during an 18-month period saved 1500 lives and $100 million in the State of Michigan.^[4] According to Atul Gawande in The New Yorker,Pronovost's "work has already saved more lives than that of any laboratory scientist in the past decade".

In 2008 Time named Pronovost one of the 100 most influential people in the world; that same year, Pronovost was awarded a MacArthur Fellowship, otherwise known as a "genius grant".

One of the good guys Peter Prononost.

Pronovost's book Safe patients, smart hospitals: how one doctor's checklist can help us change health care from the inside out was released in February 2010.


So here we have Peter Provonost whose simple check list saved 1500 lives and most hospitals ignore him. Why? Why? Why?! Is it because bad medicine is more lucrative than good medicine and while an ounce of prevention may still be worth a pound of cure treating hospital borne infections is worth a lot more... a hell of a lot more.

So much for the slick photos of attractive models portraying concerned and vigilant doctors, medical technicians and nurses. Now it's time to see the results of medical negligence when it comes to infection control.


Thanks Doc! 

Here's a link to some real people telling their stories about being infected.

Controversial Anti Obesity Video

Fat women make bad mothers and all the data supports that reality. The following video PSA drives that point home in a very powerful way. Today's women are stupid and out of control.

An anti-obesity campaign video featuring a 300-pound man having a heart attack in the ER as his life of overeating flashes before his eyes is going viral, stirring viewers with its powerful life-or-death message. The PSA, “Rewind the Future,” is from Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta’s Strong4Life wellness movement, which has made waves in the past with its shock-value campaigns. The latest video has been viewed more than 3 million times since Sunday, and is sparking intense discussion about obesity on Reddit and YouTube.

“This was me when I was a kid,” wrote one Redditor, referring to the story conveyed in the video’s succinct minute and 42 seconds. It focuses on a 32-year-old man and his path to heart disease, which began in childhood with unhealthy eating and video-game habits. Another shared, “I’m 5’9, 32 years old and almost 300 pounds. I played all those gaming systems and pretty much grew up like that… I think for the first time, a PSA got to me.”

Related: Heart Attack Grill Owner Says He’s Combating Obesity Epidemic

Others offered diet and fitness tips, and a few physicians even weighed in, including one who offered this: “As someone who is overweight (working on it, have lost considerable weight) and an MD, obesity is a very, very personal and important topic for me. I have seen time and time again obese patients crash in the hospital. Obesity is perhaps one of the worst comorbidities to have for a hospital patient. It complicates everything. Every. Single. Thing.… And while I do understand that these patients are responsible for their conditions, I cannot help but feel empathetic when I look back at my own history.”

Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, one of the largest pediatric providers in the country, originally launched the video back in 2012. But it didn’t make much of a splash until it resurfaced this week on Reddit and was subsequently picked up by BuzzFeed. “Now was when the conversation was ready to happen,” CHA wellness marketer Carolina Cruxent told Yahoo Health, referring to recent national discussions about soda bans, nutrition in schools, and obesity in general. “The time was just right.”

Related: Fat-Pride Activist Inspires Curvy Girls to Show Some Skin This Summer

Medical Errors Net The Medical Industry ONE $TRILLION Every Year

Preventable medical errors cost country $1 trillion

BY KATHRYN MAYER

October 26, 2012 • Reprints

Share on linkedinShare on twitterShare on facebookShare on emailMore Sharing Services12

Preventable medical errors may cost the United States up to $1 trillion dollars in lost human potential and contributions, according to the Journal of Health Care Finance.

That estimate is exponentially higher than previous studies, which focused solely on direct medical expenses associated with preventable medical errors. Previous studies showed the economic impact to range from $17 billion up to $50 billion annually and only focused on direct medical costs such as ancillary services, prescription drug services, and inpatient and outpatient care.

“Previous studies do not come close to illustrating the economic loss of human potential and contribution, which families, colleagues, businesses, and communities experience when someone dies from a preventable medical error,” says author Stephen Davidow, a Chicago-based health analyst. “The magnitude of the problem for our society is many orders of magnitude greater than just the medical costs.”

But researchers used “Quality-Adjusted Life Years” to develop a more complete accounting of the economic impact when someone dies from a preventable error.

The authors based their calculation on several well-accepted reports, studies, and economic measures. Based on that, there is a loss of $73.5 billion to $98 billion in QALYs. However, an article in last year’s Health Affairs says preventable deaths due to medical errors are 10 times higher than the IOM estimate. If that is the case, the economic impact is a loss of $735 billion to $980 billion—nearly $1 trillion—in human potential.

“There has been too much focus to date on just the health care cost impact of medical errors. This analysis makes an important contribution to our understanding of the broader economic impact of preventable medical harm,” says Jim Unland, editor of the Journal of Health Care Finance.

Davidow also notes that, to estimate the true economic cost of medical errors, there must be an effort to calculate lost productivity and assign a value to the economic activity of the 1 million or more patients who suffer from a medical error but survive. Some patients clearly have no long-term problems but others may be disabled for an extended period of time or for the rest of their lives. What this means is that the economic impact could be much greater than $1 trillion dollars.

Read more click here Greedy Deadly Doctors

Related Articles

• UnitedHealth makes transparency app available to public
• ‘It’s all about the consumer’
• Some states implement HSAs for Medicaid expansion
• What consumers want in a doctor
• Senator’s PPACA subsidy suit dismissed

How to Get Fat and How To Get Skinny

I, Fat Bastard have always said vegetables are what food eats. Proud FA, the former Dean of Feederism will tell you this one undeniable fact... FAT FATTENS BEST.

Two of the greatest forces responsible for the obesity bloom are Dr Arthur Agatston of the South Beach DIEt and the late great Dr Robert Atkins of the Atkins diet. Atkins was obese as hell when he died and Agatston is a fat boy who needs to take statin drugs. OINK! A minor player in that game is Barry Sears of the Zone Diet.

           Why Are Thai Girls So Skinny? Low Insulin?

When I Fat Bastardo really want to have a foodfest or a gluttony safari and I do quite regularly I take a little extra insulin to spike my already huge appetite. Like the Chef, I am a big man with a big appetite and I ain't makin no apologies for it.

Low Carb diets make you fat. That said... fat guys should do low carb and fat girls need to slim down and eat the way Asian girls eat. Asian chicks are HOT and Belly Boy will attest to that. Asian chicks eat high carb diets consisting of of fruit and rice.

American Medicine More Deadly Than Terrorists

The Following from Natural News

America was rudely awakened to a new kind of danger on September 11, 2001: Terrorism. The attacks that day left 2,996 people dead, including the passengers on the four commercial airliners that were used as weapons. Many feel it was the most tragic day in U.S. history.

Four commercial jets crashed that day. But what if six jumbo jets crashed every day in the United States, claiming the lives of 783,936 people every year? That would certainly qualify as a massive tragedy, wouldn't it?

Well, forget "what if." The tragedy is happening right now. Over 750,000 people actually do die in the United States every year, although not from plane crashes. They die from something far more common and rarely perceived by the public as dangerous: modern medicine.

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes. That's the equivalent of six jumbo jet crashes a day for an entire year. But where is the media attention for this tragedy? Where is the government support for stopping these medical mistakes before they happen?

After 9/11, the White House gave rise to the Department of Homeland Security, designed to prevent terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. Since its inception, billions of dollars have been poured into it. The 2006 budget allots $34.2 billion to the DHS, a number that has come down slightly from the $37.7 billion budget of 2003.

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths. And that's a conservative estimate; only a fraction of medical errors are reported, according to the study. Actual medical mistakes are likely to be 20 times higher than the reported number because doctors fear retaliation for those mistakes. The American public heads to the doctor's office or the hospital time and again, oblivious of the alarming danger they're heading into. The public knows that medical errors occur, but they assume that errors are unusual, isolated events. Unfortunately, by accepting conventional medicine, patients voluntarily continue to walk into the leading cause of death in America.

According to a 1995 U.S. iatrogenic report, "Over a million patients are injured in U.S. hospitals each year, and approximately 280,000 die annually as a result of these injuries. Therefore, the iatrogenic death rate dwarfs the annual automobile accident mortality rate of 45,000 and accounts for more deaths than all other accidents combined." This report was issued 10 years ago, when America had 34 million fewer citizens and drug company scandals like the Vioxx recall were yet to occur. Today, health care comprises 15.5 percent of the United States' gross national product, with spending reaching $1.4 trillion in 2004.

Since Americans spend so much money on health care, they should be getting a high quality of care, right? Unfortunately, that's not the case. Of the 783,936 annual deaths due to conventional medical mistakes, about 106,000 are from prescription drugs, according to Death by Medicine. That also is a conservative number. Some experts estimate it should be more like 200,000 because of underreported cases of adverse drug reactions.

Americans today are used to fixing problems the quick way – even when it comes to their health. Thus, they rely heavily on prescription drugs to fix their diseases. For every conceivable ailment – real or not – chances are there's a pricey prescription drug to "treat" it. Chances are even better that their drug of choice comes chock full of side effects.

The problem is, prescription drugs don't treat diseases; they merely cover the symptoms. U.S. physicians provide allopathic health care – that is, they care for disease, not health. So, the over-prescription of drugs and medications is designed to treat disease instead of preventing it. And because there are so many drugs available, unforeseen adverse drug reactions are all too common, which leads to the highly conservative annual prescription drug death rate of 106,000. Keep in mind that these numbers came before the Vioxx scandal, and Cox-2 inhibitor drugs could ultimately end up killing tens of thousands more.

American medical patients are getting the short end of a rather raw deal when it comes to prescription drugs. Medicine is a high-dollar, highly competitive business. But it shouldn't be. Null's report cites the five most important aspects of health that modern medicine ignores in favor of the almighty dollar: Stress, lack of exercise, high calorie intake, highly processed foods and environmental toxin exposure. All these things are putting Americans in such poor health that they run to the doctor for treatment. But instead of doctors treating the causes of their poor health, such as putting them on a strict diet and exercise regimen, they stuff them full of prescription drugs to cover their symptoms. Using this inherently faulty system of medical treatment, it's no wonder so many Americans die from prescription drugs. They're not getting better; they're just popping drugs to make their symptoms temporarily go away.

But not all doctors subscribe to this method of "treatment." In fact, many doctors are just as angry as the public should be, charging that scientific medicine is "for sale" to the highest bidder – which, more often than not, end up being pharmaceutical companies. The pharmaceutical industry is a multi-trillion dollar business. Companies spend billions on advertising and promotions for prescription drugs. Who can remember the last time they watched television and weren't bombarded with ads for pills treating everything from erectile dysfunction to sleeplessness? And who has ever been to a doctor's office or hospital and not seen every pen, notepad and post-it bearing the logo of some prescription drug?

Medical experts claim that patients' requests for certain drugs have no effect on the number of prescriptions written for that drug. Pharmaceutical companies claim their drug ads are "educational" to the public. The public believes the FDA reviews all the ads and only allows the safest and most effective drug ads to reach the public. It's a clever system: Pharmaceutical companies influence the public to ask for prescription drugs, the public asks their physicians to prescribe them certain drugs, and doctors acquiesce to their patients' requests. Everyone's happy, right? Not quite, since the prescription drug death toll continues to rise.

The public seems to genuinely believe that drugs advertised on TV are safe, in spite of the plethora of side effects listed by the commercial's narrator, ranging from diarrhea to death. Patients feel justified in asking their physicians to prescribe them a particular drug they've seen on TV, since it surely must be safe or it wouldn't have been advertised. Remember all those TV ads heralding the wonders of Vioxx? One might wonder how many lives could have been spared if patients didn't see the ad on TV and request a prescription from their doctors.

But advertising isn't the only tool the pharmaceutical industry uses to influence medicine. Null's study cites an ABC report that said pharmaceutical companies spend over $2 billion sending doctors to more than 314,000 events every year. While doctors are riding the dollar of pharmaceutical companies, enjoying all the many perks of these "events," how likely are they to question the validity of drug companies or their products?

Admittedly, not all doctors reside in the pockets of the pharmaceutical companies. Some are downright angry at the situation, and angry on behalf of an unaware public. Major conflicts of interest exist between the American public, the medical community and the pharmaceutical industry. And although the public suffers the most from this conflict, it is the least informed. The public gets the short end of the stick and they don't even know it. That is why the pharmaceutical industry remains a multi-trillion dollar business.

Prescription drugs are only a part of the U.S. healthcare system's miserable failings. In fact, outpatient deaths, bedsore deaths and malnutrition deaths each account for higher death rates than adverse drug reactions. The problems run deep and cannot be remedied without drastic, widespread change in the system's money and ethics.

The first issue – money – is the main reason the medical industry cannot seem to change. Prescribing more drugs and recommending more surgeries means more profits. Getting more drugs approved by the FDA, regardless of their safety, means more money for the pharmaceutical industry. As the healthcare system stands today, physicians and drug companies can't seem to pass up earning loads of money, even if a few hundred thousand people lose their lives in the process. Even in drastic cases of deadly drugs, everyone involved has a scapegoat: Drug companies can blame the FDA for approving their product and the doctors for over-prescribing it, and doctors can blame the patients for wanting it and not properly weighing the risks.

What ultimately arises is a question of ethics. In layman's terms, ethics are the rules or moral guidelines that govern the conduct of people or professions. Some ethics are ingrained from childhood, but some are specifically set forth. For example, nearly all medical schools have their new doctors take a modern form of the Hippocratic Oath. While few versions are identical, none include setting aside proper medical care in favor of money-making practices.

On the research side of the issue, "Death by Medicine" cites an ABC report that says clinical trials funded by pharmaceutical companies show a 90 percent chance that a drug will be perceived as effective, whereas clinical trials not funded by drug companies show only a 50 percent chance that a drug will be perceived as effective. "It appears that money can’t buy you love, but it can buy you any 'scientific' result you want," writes Null and his team of researchers.

The government spends upwards of $30 billion a year on homeland security. Such spending seems important. Since 2001, 2,996 people in the United States have died from terrorism – all as a result of the 9/11 attacks. In that same period of time, 490,000 people have died from prescription drugs, not counting the Vioxx scandal. That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Couldn't a little chunk of the homeland security money be better spent on overhauling the corrupt U.S. healthcare system, the leading cause of death in America? Couldn't we forfeit the color-coded threat system in favor of stricter guidelines on medical research and prescription drugs? No one is attempting to say that terrorism in the world is not a problem, especially for a high-profile country like the United States. No one is saying that the people who died on 9/11 didn't matter or weren't horribly wronged by the terrorists that day. But there are more dangerous things in the United States being falsely represented as safe and healthy, when, in reality, they are deadly. The corruption in the pharmaceutical industry and in America's healthcare system poses a far greater threat to the health, safety and welfare of Americans today than terrorism.

If the Obama Administration really wants to save lives -- a lot of lives -- it needs look no further than the chemical war has been declared on Americans by Big Pharma.


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz35oHf54h4