7 ms·

Assuming this is a genuine effort and not some kind of corruption, this potentially sounds great. But as far as bang for the healthcare buck goes, why not advo

Assuming this is a genuine effort and not some kind of corruption, this potentially sounds great. But as far as bang for the healthcare buck goes, why not advocate a serious national physical fitness campaign? Many people have gained weight and lost their fitness during the last 2 years, and we're doubling down on doing counterproductive things in cities like introducing friction and barriers for people to get to the gym in the name of defending them from Covid which is completely backwards. Losing weight is probably the single best thing the nation could do for not only better Covid outcomes, but also improving a bunch of other health issues from diabetes to heart disease and possibly cancer as well, if I remember right.

toiletfuneral 5y ago
[dead]
kevbin 5y ago
> Assuming this is a genuine effort and not some kind of corruption, this potentially sounds great. It’s a genuine effort to put something positive on the table for the administration as the mid-term elections ramp up. Biden, like his predecessor, is historically unpopular. The administration is desperate to do anything to maintain control of the house and senate. This “plan” is a retread of Biden’s 2012 scheme that went nowhere. As for corruption, probably just run-of-the-mill NIH feudalism. Even Joe Biden isn’t so brazenly corrupt that he’d directly pay his bag men while he’s the sitting President. It’s good to see cancer get more money & attention, regardless of the motive.
deeviant 5y ago
What makes you think that money spent on changing peoples behavior, will actually change their behavior? What statistics do we have that would make this a "better bang for healthcare buck?"
- ohyeshedid 5y ago
  What do you think the most important meal of the day is?
- wolverine876 5y ago
  There is a lot of research on those questions. The people doing it aren't taking shots in the dark.
  - deeviant 5y ago
    Do you really think that the US obesity epidemic could ended simply but public outreach campaigns? If so, I have 4 bridges to sell you. Now, if you would be advocating banning advertisements for fast food, candy and other junk , you might be on to something.
picodguyo 5y ago
Not the NIH, but this was actually a thing for several decades up until Trump: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_President%27s_Challenge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_President%27s_Challenge It does not seem to have been effective.
BurningFrog 5y ago
The benefits of exercise are already well known, by pretty much everybody. The power of government PSA campaigns is also well known. On average, they enrich advertising agencies and produce no change in the public's behaviour.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > The power of government PSA campaigns is also well known. On average, they enrich advertising agencies and produce no change in the public's behaviour. It's not well known at all to me. What is the basis of that?
nradov 5y ago
This isn't really a problem that the federal government can solve. The President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition has existed for decades but was never very effective. We could make some minor improvements around the edges by giving income tax credits for things like sports equipment, participation fees, diet counseling, etc. Most of the really pointless and counterproductive Covid restrictions were implemented at the state and local levels where the NIH has no real authority.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > The President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition has existed for decades but was never very effective. It didn't fix everything, but what were its aims and what were the outcomes?
14 5y ago
What about smoking and alcohol consumption, both linked to increased rates of cancer.l, as well. This is just anecdotal but alcohol seems like such an American culture and the prices are incredibly cheap as compared to Canada. I remember buying a 26oz vodka for $7.50 in Hawaii a state where they had to fly that vodka in. Vodka here in Canada would cost me about 3 times the price. Same with cigarettes they are about 2 times the cost here in Canada. People here of course still smoke and drink but I know many have quite due to price. It seems if the government really wanted to reduce cancer it would target some of the other risk factors like smoking and drinking as well.
moistly 5y ago
> a serious national physical fitness campaign ParticipACTION! Unfortunately, although it gets high marks for awareness, trust, and organizational capacity, it doesn’t seem to have been very effective: Canadian kids are at the bottom of the rankings for fitness and activities.
bradleyjg 5y ago
It’s a worthy goal but I doubt the government could move the needle with any amount of money, much less with just $1.8 billion. Culture is incredibly difficult to intentionally shift. People actively resist when they feel they are being manipulated even if it is supposed to be for their own good.
- mdorazio 5y ago
  I disagree. The government could easily move the needle if it had the guts to implement nationwide financial changes that would actually make a difference on food contents - tax sugary foods & drinks, implement a sugar daily % value, end corn and dairy subsidies, etc.
  - bradleyjg 5y ago
    I remember when Bloomberg put in some sugary food taxes in NYC. Do you know if there’s any data on whether those policies worked?
    - mdorazio 5y ago
      I remember it being unpopular, but haven't seen results on the NYC one specifically. Wikipedia has a roundup of results on a few similar implementations, though, and they seem to somewhat work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugary_drink_tax#Consumption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugary_drink_tax#Consumption
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > Culture is incredibly difficult to intentionally shift. Look how much culture has changed in the last few years, in a direction that closely matches the intentions of some powerful people. Look at changes around public health, smoking for example. > People actively resist when they feel they are being manipulated The only way to change things is to manipulate people? > It’s a worthy goal but I doubt the government could move the needle with any amount of money If you are talking about promoting exercise, here I agree: More money isn't always needed.
- 5y ago

toiletfuneral 5y ago

[dead]

kevbin 5y ago

> Assuming this is a genuine effort and not some kind of corruption, this potentially sounds great. It’s a genuine effort to put something positive on the table for the administration as the mid-term elections ramp up. Biden, like his predecessor, is historically unpopular. The administration is desperate to do anything to maintain control of the house and senate. This “plan” is a retread of Biden’s 2012 scheme that went nowhere. As for corruption, probably just run-of-the-mill NIH feudalism. Even Joe Biden isn’t so brazenly corrupt that he’d directly pay his bag men while he’s the sitting President. It’s good to see cancer get more money & attention, regardless of the motive.

deeviant 5y ago

What makes you think that money spent on changing peoples behavior, will actually change their behavior? What statistics do we have that would make this a "better bang for healthcare buck?"

ohyeshedid 5y ago
What do you think the most important meal of the day is?
wolverine876 5y ago
There is a lot of research on those questions. The people doing it aren't taking shots in the dark.
- deeviant 5y ago
  Do you really think that the US obesity epidemic could ended simply but public outreach campaigns? If so, I have 4 bridges to sell you. Now, if you would be advocating banning advertisements for fast food, candy and other junk , you might be on to something.

picodguyo 5y ago

Not the NIH, but this was actually a thing for several decades up until Trump: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_President%27s_Challenge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_President%27s_Challenge It does not seem to have been effective.

BurningFrog 5y ago

The benefits of exercise are already well known, by pretty much everybody. The power of government PSA campaigns is also well known. On average, they enrich advertising agencies and produce no change in the public's behaviour.

wolverine876 5y ago
> The power of government PSA campaigns is also well known. On average, they enrich advertising agencies and produce no change in the public's behaviour. It's not well known at all to me. What is the basis of that?

nradov 5y ago

This isn't really a problem that the federal government can solve. The President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition has existed for decades but was never very effective. We could make some minor improvements around the edges by giving income tax credits for things like sports equipment, participation fees, diet counseling, etc. Most of the really pointless and counterproductive Covid restrictions were implemented at the state and local levels where the NIH has no real authority.

wolverine876 5y ago
> The President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition has existed for decades but was never very effective. It didn't fix everything, but what were its aims and what were the outcomes?

14 5y ago

What about smoking and alcohol consumption, both linked to increased rates of cancer.l, as well. This is just anecdotal but alcohol seems like such an American culture and the prices are incredibly cheap as compared to Canada. I remember buying a 26oz vodka for $7.50 in Hawaii a state where they had to fly that vodka in. Vodka here in Canada would cost me about 3 times the price. Same with cigarettes they are about 2 times the cost here in Canada. People here of course still smoke and drink but I know many have quite due to price. It seems if the government really wanted to reduce cancer it would target some of the other risk factors like smoking and drinking as well.

moistly 5y ago

> a serious national physical fitness campaign ParticipACTION! Unfortunately, although it gets high marks for awareness, trust, and organizational capacity, it doesn’t seem to have been very effective: Canadian kids are at the bottom of the rankings for fitness and activities.

bradleyjg 5y ago

It’s a worthy goal but I doubt the government could move the needle with any amount of money, much less with just $1.8 billion. Culture is incredibly difficult to intentionally shift. People actively resist when they feel they are being manipulated even if it is supposed to be for their own good.

mdorazio 5y ago
I disagree. The government could easily move the needle if it had the guts to implement nationwide financial changes that would actually make a difference on food contents - tax sugary foods & drinks, implement a sugar daily % value, end corn and dairy subsidies, etc.
- bradleyjg 5y ago
  I remember when Bloomberg put in some sugary food taxes in NYC. Do you know if there’s any data on whether those policies worked?
  - mdorazio 5y ago
    I remember it being unpopular, but haven't seen results on the NYC one specifically. Wikipedia has a roundup of results on a few similar implementations, though, and they seem to somewhat work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugary_drink_tax#Consumption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugary_drink_tax#Consumption
wolverine876 5y ago
> Culture is incredibly difficult to intentionally shift. Look how much culture has changed in the last few years, in a direction that closely matches the intentions of some powerful people. Look at changes around public health, smoking for example. > People actively resist when they feel they are being manipulated The only way to change things is to manipulate people? > It’s a worthy goal but I doubt the government could move the needle with any amount of money If you are talking about promoting exercise, here I agree: More money isn't always needed.
5y ago