> from a public health perspective “get up a move” is a perfectly reasonable message. How? Does it achieve any real result? It's ineffective and does not addre

> from a public health perspective “get up a move” is a perfectly reasonable message. How? Does it achieve any real result? It's ineffective and does not address other issues that have a much greater impact in the obesity epidemic in the US: food deserts, the corn industry pushing processed foods everywhere and making it so cheap that leaves no good choice for poor people, a horribly wrong "food pyramid" recommendation, car-centric urban environments that robs people of opportunities for natural activity, etc, etc, etc... > The idea that the only possible benefit is saving your life is moving the goalposts on health policy. This is the complete opposite of what I am saying. I don't even know how you could interpret what I said as such. I am saying that if obesity is such a serious problem that even a flu can be fatal, then the health agencies should be putting more effort in spreading that message instead of "hey, this flu might save you in case you are obese, so you should take it. Don't worry about addressing the real problem you have, you should be fine as long as you can keep taking the drugs we think it's best for you". To put another way: if you get the FDA to put cigarette-style, super-graphic pictures of diseases affecting obese people in the label of every food product that comes in a box or can, then I will start giving some credibility to them. Until them, I have absolutely no reason to care about or listen to any of their "general" recommendations.