 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / June 2009{OT:} Limbaugh says physical fitness causes high healthcare costs
Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. > Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. Exercise fanatics are often responsible for incurring related injuries which are a drain on the system. Obsessive yuppie runners are the worst. In article <a3537c60-a45b-4b2c-9e38-f42759bba432@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. No, he's right and you are wrong. People are injured all the time running, walking, biking, swimming, climbing mountains, jumping out of airplanes, etc. But those statistics are not shown, only those from smokers, and fast food junkies, which have been determined by the left wing freaks to be bad for us. Again, the left wants to keep thumb on the little people, power over the masses.  Signature"Holy Cow!!" Earl Gillespie I once read where a statistician said statistics are only a guide line. If we replaced the word "smoke," in the statistical mix with the word "Milk," that the average number of illnesses and deaths in the statistics would be HIGHER, since far more people have consumed MILK than have ever smoked. LOL > In article > <a3537c60-a45b-4b2c-9e38-f42759bba432@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > wing freaks to be bad for us. Again, the left wants to keep thumb on > the little people, power over the masses. > Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. There is no doubt that people sometimes injure themselves running and so on. The only question here is the NET effect: Does the increased risk of broken bones and torn ligaments due to exercise create more of a strain on the system than if those people did not exercise and so were therefore at a decreased risk for those things....and here's the important part...but at a DECREASED risk for heart disease, diabetes, etc. That's the issue here. Does anyone know the answer to that? (And did Limbaugh address the other part (the decrease in heart disease etc., or just the increase for broken bones etc.?) How come all the people that write all the fitness books are dead? LOL On Jun 12, 11:06 pm, edspyhill01 <edspyhil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. There is no doubt that people sometimes injure themselves running and so on. The only question here is the NET effect: Does the increased risk of broken bones and torn ligaments due to exercise create more of a strain on the system than if those people did not exercise and so were therefore at a decreased risk for those things....and here's the important part...but at a DECREASED risk for heart disease, diabetes, etc. That's the issue here. Does anyone know the answer to that? (And did Limbaugh address the other part (the decrease in heart disease etc., or just the increase for broken bones etc.?) > How come all the people that write all the fitness books are dead? LOL 90% of them preached junk science and followed their own teachings. On Jun 13, 11:24 pm, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com> wrote: > > How come all the people that write all the fitness books are dead? LOL > > 90% of them preached junk science and followed their own teachings. Well, the real cause of this is that we simply remember the fitness gurus who died and forget about the ones that don't. We do the opposite for unhealthy people- forget about the ones who died and remember the ones that live old (Keith Richards?). Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if there was A LITTLE something to it. Something is odd about THAT much f.cking exercise. It's all about moderation. Eat "junk" food only on occasion, and get a decent amount of exercise. Leave the rest up to fate (well, genetics). That's what I say, at least. And to answer the person above: No, you are not the only one who thinks Rush's argument is patently absurd. At least how it's been represented in this thread-- I didn't hear his original broadcast. Speaking of which I am kind of curious- Did Rush mention the significantly decreased risk of various (expensive) health problems that goes along with exercise or only the increased risk of (cheap-by- comparison) injuries? On Jun 13, 11:24 pm, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com> wrote: > Mike wrote: > > > How come all the people that write all the fitness books are dead? LOL > > 90% of them preached junk science and followed their own teachings. Well, the real cause of this is that we simply remember the fitness gurus who died and forget about the ones that don't. We do the opposite for unhealthy people- forget about the ones who died and remember the ones that live old (Keith Richards?). **** The Jim Fixx/Jack Lalanne conundrum? Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if there was A LITTLE something to it. Something is odd about THAT much f.cking exercise. It's all about moderation. Eat "junk" food only on occasion, and get a decent amount of exercise. Leave the rest up to fate (well, genetics). That's what I say, at least. And to answer the person above: No, you are not the only one who thinks Rush's argument is patently absurd. At least how it's been represented in this thread-- I didn't hear his original broadcast. Speaking of which I am kind of curious- Did Rush mention the significantly decreased risk of various (expensive) health problems that goes along with exercise or only the increased risk of (cheap-by- comparison) injuries? > **** The Jim Fixx/Jack Lalanne conundrum? Yes, thanks- that illustrates the point nicely: I knew Jim Fixx was dead right away (heart attack age 54), but had to check wikipedia for Jack Lalanne's 'status'. Alive and 94 years old. This caught my eye: 1984 (age 70): Once again handcuffed and shackled, Jack fought strong winds and currents as he swam 1.5 miles (2.4 km) while towing 70 boats with 70 people from the Queen's Way Bridge in the Long Beach Harbor to the Queen Mary. >> **** The Jim Fixx/Jack Lalanne conundrum? > > Yes, thanks- that illustrates the point nicely: I knew Jim Fixx was > dead right away (heart attack age 54), but had to check wikipedia for > Jack Lalanne's 'status'. Alive and 94 years old. Actually Fixx was 52, and had a hereditary condition if memory serves. His father died in his forties. Had Fixx not been as active as he was, he'd likely not have had those few extra years. About a year or so ago, I read a fitness magazine article on Jack. The writer was granted the interview on the condition that he participate in LaLanne's daily workout. After quite some time, the guy who was in his thirties, was nearing the end of his rope. He thought there was no way that he'd let LaLanne best him. Nearing his breaking point, LaLanne said, "That's it." He was relieved until LaLanne said, "Warm-up's over. Now to the workout." > >> **** The Jim Fixx/Jack Lalanne conundrum? > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > LaLanne said, "That's it." He was relieved until LaLanne said, > "Warm-up's over. Now to the workout." :-) > >> **** The Jim Fixx/Jack Lalanne conundrum? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Actually Fixx was 52, and had a hereditary condition if memory serves. > His father died in his forties. 52, yes. f.cking genes. > Had Fixx not been as active as he was, he'd likely not have had those > few extra years. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > LaLanne said, "That's it." He was relieved until LaLanne said, > "Warm-up's over. Now to the workout." HA! Well, almost all here seem to agree that the exercise-is-a-drain-on- the-heathcare-system argument is utter horse poo poo. > HA! > > Well, almost all here seem to agree that the exercise-is-a-drain-on- > the-heathcare-system argument is utter horse poo poo. Can we continue this discussion at the gym. I'll hold the treadmill next to me for you. > Can we continue this discussion at the gym. I'll hold the treadmill > next to me for you. Treadmill? So, a.shole, how many injuries have you sustained on that thing that **I'** have had to pay for? (I've been doing some soul searching and decided that Rush was right). >Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if there was A LITTLE >something to it. Something is odd about THAT much f.cking exercise. ROFLMAO On that we agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SignatureScott in Florida On Jun 12, 11:06 pm, edspyhill01 <edspyhil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. There is no doubt that people sometimes injure themselves running and so on. The only question here is the NET effect: Does the increased risk of broken bones and torn ligaments due to exercise create more of a strain on the system than if those people did not exercise and so were therefore at a decreased risk for those things....and here's the important part...but at a DECREASED risk for heart disease, diabetes, etc. That's the issue here. Does anyone know the answer to that? (And did Limbaugh address the other part (the decrease in heart disease etc., or just the increase for broken bones etc.?) =================== This particular theory of Limbaugh's doesn't even deserve discussion. Even if you factor things like knee or hip problems into the health care equation, those costs pale in comparison to the price tag for people rotting in hospitals for months or years because of heart problems. Next subject, please. On Jun 13, 12:15 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstr...@frontiernet.net> wrote: > This particular theory of Limbaugh's doesn't even deserve discussion. Even > if you factor things like knee or hip problems into the health care > equation, those costs pale in comparison to the price tag for people rotting > in hospitals for months or years because of heart problems. > > Next subject, please. Yes, but look how fast the rightwingnuts accepted Limball's lunatic premise and came to his defense and bought into the premise hook, line and sinker. Wow, what an obedient rightwingnut crew. > Does anyone know the answer to that? (And did Limbaugh address the > other part (the decrease in heart disease etc., or just the increase > for broken bones etc.?) No. But am I the only one who sees this latest Limpballs rant as sheer lunacy? > Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. I didn't even read your post yet. But somehow putting Limbaugh and "physical fitness" in the same sentance is just *WRONG*!! (although he did look OK when he was married, but he's put some of it back on...) > Limbaugh was ranting about how people who are physically fit, exercise > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. Ya gotta admit Rush looks like he's doing his part to help keep health costs down. ;<) > > and play sports are the cause of high healthcare costs. > > > He's lost it and he can no longer hide the fact. > > Ya gotta admit Rush looks like he's doing his part to help keep health costs > down. ;<) ;-) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.