Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs - Page 2

flyover · November 5th, 2004, 08:17

You are right on the money. But the problem is not the farmers nearly as much as Con Agra and ADM. These extremely powerful companies literally control the food supply in this country. They will be relunctant to switch from corn fructose, but if consumers demand it and the obesity/diabetes problem becomes a serious focus, it could happen.

Remember too that the pharmaceuticals and doctors aren't encouraging any big changes. They want people to believe that diabetes is a disease treated by their drugs instead of diet. So a lot of influential people want to make their money off us fat folks.

I was just trying to calculate how much extra fuel was burned over my career because of hauling the difference in my "ideal" weight and my actual weight. But my calculator was too small.

Hootie · November 5th, 2004, 09:34

[ QUOTE ]
The fact of the matter is people need to take responsibility for their own actions. If you can't say no to a that next potato chip, what makes you fit to make any decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true Ophir. I heard something the other day (I think on that documentary on McDonanlds), like that when is it going to become socially acceptable to tell an obese person that they shouldn't have that piece of cake or to put down that bag of chips. Comparing it to smoking and how that has become over the years acceptable to show no sympathy for the person and to give them a lecture of "you shouldn't do that". People need to take responsibility for their decisions and choose wisely and get of their butt once in a while.

Ophir · November 5th, 2004, 09:42

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact of the matter is people need to take responsibility for their own actions. If you can't say no to a that next potato chip, what makes you fit to make any decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true Ophir. I heard something the other day (I think on that documentary on McDonanlds), like that when is it going to become socially acceptable to tell an obese person that they shouldn't have that piece of cake or to put down that bag of chips. Comparing it to smoking and how that has become over the years acceptable to show no sympathy for the person and to give them a lecture of "you shouldn't do that". People need to take responsibility for their decisions and choose wisely and get of their butt once in a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

All people with greater that 25% body fat need to stand at least 50 feet from any public entrance while eating.

tonyw · November 5th, 2004, 10:56

Yes and no. Look, we've danced all around the topic but we've never come down to the bottom line.

It doesn't matter if it's from carbs, protein, or fat. All the focus on low fat, low carbs, low this, low that is missing the point.

If you take in less calories than you burn, you will lose weight. If you take in more calories than you burn, you will gain weight.

Now, when you're drinking the high fructose corn syrup that ADM produces in your super big gulp, how many calories is that? About 1,000? That's about half of the daily recommended caloric intake.

That's the problem. The high fructose corn syrup is part of the problem, but people consuming too much of it is the main problem.

MikeD · November 5th, 2004, 11:13

[ QUOTE ]

If you take in less calories than you burn, you will lose weight. If you take in more calories than you burn, you will gain weight.

[/ QUOTE ]

More getting to the brass-tacks.

[ QUOTE ]

That's the problem. The high fructose corn syrup is part of the problem, but people consuming too much of it is the main problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Every food is caloric or fattening in some way or another. The person's self control (or not) is the bottom line.

flyover · November 5th, 2004, 11:28

Sorry but too simplistic.

The things that fructose does to your body, and the things that protein does to your body (or require of your organs) are not the same thing.

That's why I think the link between the diabetes epidemic and the fructose onslaught will be confirmed, and it's not just about how many calories of fructose you consume. The huge spike in diabetes and the transition to fructose are direct correlations.

The reason there hasn't been a general alarm is the above discussed special interests. As has been said food recommendations are all politics and almost no science.

So when you push the "it's just the number of calories, it's not what you eat" line you are in agreement with the major food processors who do not want you to look at fructose.

And BTW, of special interest to pilots, is the fact that every time Atkins style diets have been put against American Heart Association diets the Atkins diet reduces cholesterol and artery hardening more effectively. The AHA is fighting this like mad. But I think, like diabetes, heart disease will be found to be linked more to carbohydrate intake than fat intake. (I'm not a scientist but I have a reservation at a Holiday Inn Express).

So we may finally figure out why spaghetti eating, running pioneer Jim Fixx died of a massive heart attack. Of course, over the years since then, everytime a high-carbohydrate advocating exerciser has a heart attack it's blamed on genetics (so they've got that going for them, which is good).

We'll figure this diet thing out someday. Hopefully it will be found that beer and wings are the nectar of health.

Ophir · November 5th, 2004, 11:29

And consumer spending habits are where the focus can go too. If people don't like what ADM and Monsanto are doing then don't buy their goods. They will get the picture really quickly. But the problem is people's apathy; they don't care. They want the companies not provide them with a quick solution to their inability to restrain their eating habits. They don't want to read labels and find out what is good for you and what isn't. They don't want someone telling them that what they are doing in their life is distructive because it is their liberty to be self-destructive, that is until they become a burden on everyone else. They want the government to regulate bad food and drugs but they don't want bigger government. They want to take more money home in taxes and want the government out of their lives but bitch when corporations, how have the same mandate, take advantage of their insatisible appetites for self-destruction. Wake up and take charge of your life, it is the only true asset you will ever have.

adreamer · November 5th, 2004, 12:23

I am going to say something about this topic since I have study some of obesity issues. I agree with TonyW. I really do not care about what you eat. The bottom line is if you put in more than you burn, you will gain few extra pounds. Human body design is about the same as few thousand years ago. Therefore, your body burn energy intake in this order: Carb. Proteins, and Fat. All diets are manipulation of this system. For example, low carb diet, it basically takes out carb of your intake. In this case, your body have to burn protein, then fat.

First, what does extra pound mean? In this world, you will obey the law of physics wether you like it or not. It means it does cost more fuel to make takeoff. Try to think about 100 people average weight about 180 lbs vs. 100 people who average weigh about 250 lbs. That is a 7000 lbs difference. I believe airplane can achieve Vr a little quicker.

Second, if you have heart attack, knee replacement surgery, or high blood pressure because of your weight, how much money do you think overall the medical cost on you alone? I promise you will not pay all of it. I can give you a figure from my previous job experience. When you walk into E.R, before doc even look at you and not riding ambulance, that is a 50 ~ 80 dollars registration fee. X ray is about 100 dollars. What about open heart surgery? Who pick the rest of your bill?

My suggestion is to check and write down your diet. Go ahead, write down what you have for the next week. You will be surprised. For JCers, if my memory serve me correct, high blood pressure can ground you in a heart beat.

adreamer

PaulThomas · November 5th, 2004, 12:25

[ QUOTE ]
Fuel burn increases by as much as 10% of what ever weight you add. Many variables, such as stage length, but it works out to between 6 and 10%. I use 10% as my rough gouge for adding weight, be it fuel or what ever.

What that means is that if you have 100 more pounds, you burn 10 pounds more fuel. If you have 200 pax that after 20 pounds more each, that means you've burned 400 more pounds of fuel. That's 60 gallons. And I bet that we're talking about more weight/person than 20 pounds, plus the extra stuff people carry with them....

[/ QUOTE ]

And then you have to add gas because you're carrying more gas which is weight...

Sprint100 · November 5th, 2004, 12:49

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The federal government has declared war on fat people.

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean like the war on drugs, the war on poverty, or the war on terra?

We've seen how effective those are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't you catch the headlines? Fat people are now a part of the axis of evil!

November 5th, 2004, 12:52

Nevermind, TheWife said it (be charged by the pound)

tonyw · November 5th, 2004, 13:38

They just did a piece on this on CNBC. They had a guy I know pretty well representing the airlines' prespective and some woman who works for the National Association for Fat Acceptance or some wacko group like that.

The guy I know had a great line -- when you're trying to fight gravity, weight is not your friend.

Sprint100 · November 5th, 2004, 15:50

[ QUOTE ]
National Association for Fat Acceptance

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever the name may be, I am still laughing that they have an "organized" group like that.

Doug Taylor · November 5th, 2004, 16:06

I was watching "The View" as I was shaving this morning and Star Jones, ("I'm Star and I'm a LO'yuh") thought it was some conspiracy to raise ticket prices.

This is a rough paraphrase but she said something to the extent of "We already pay too much to fly. Now they want to use this as an excuse to get mo [sic] money out of us. What's an average plan carry, 400 people? Well, if we're all ten pounds heavier, you can't tell me it takes mo [sic] gas to fly an extra 40,000 lbs. It's just sick".

Not only is she not a math whiz, she perhaps has no concept that an extra 4,000 lbs is equivalent to an extra 25 people by using the FAA's current (old?) average pax weight.

Math and science in public. Recipe for disaster!

JDMcFly · November 5th, 2004, 16:51

Whats wrong with increased airline ticket prices? It needs to happen across the board.

Doug Taylor · November 5th, 2004, 17:29

I know.

Just another celeb talking out of her ass!

tonyw · November 5th, 2004, 18:06

And in the case of that particular celebrity, there is plenty of ass to talk out of.

QXDVR · November 5th, 2004, 18:13

I saw that on the news this morn and its interesting timing because our new Weight and Balance program increases the weight of pax so we can't even fly full anymore on our smaller planes. So much for the benefit of a jumpseat. STOP EATING!!!

November 5th, 2004, 08:17	#26
flyover Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,389	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs You are right on the money. But the problem is not the farmers nearly as much as Con Agra and ADM. These extremely powerful companies literally control the food supply in this country. They will be relunctant to switch from corn fructose, but if consumers demand it and the obesity/diabetes problem becomes a serious focus, it could happen. Remember too that the pharmaceuticals and doctors aren't encouraging any big changes. They want people to believe that diabetes is a disease treated by their drugs instead of diet. So a lot of influential people want to make their money off us fat folks. I was just trying to calculate how much extra fuel was burned over my career because of hauling the difference in my "ideal" weight and my actual weight. But my calculator was too small.

November 5th, 2004, 09:34	#27
Hootie Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Zona Posts: 1,182	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs [ QUOTE ] The fact of the matter is people need to take responsibility for their own actions. If you can't say no to a that next potato chip, what makes you fit to make any decision? [/ QUOTE ] Very true Ophir. I heard something the other day (I think on that documentary on McDonanlds), like that when is it going to become socially acceptable to tell an obese person that they shouldn't have that piece of cake or to put down that bag of chips. Comparing it to smoking and how that has become over the years acceptable to show no sympathy for the person and to give them a lecture of "you shouldn't do that". People need to take responsibility for their decisions and choose wisely and get of their butt once in a while.

November 5th, 2004, 09:42	#28
Ophir Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: was Ophir, CO, now in SLC! Posts: 1,481	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The fact of the matter is people need to take responsibility for their own actions. If you can't say no to a that next potato chip, what makes you fit to make any decision? [/ QUOTE ] Very true Ophir. I heard something the other day (I think on that documentary on McDonanlds), like that when is it going to become socially acceptable to tell an obese person that they shouldn't have that piece of cake or to put down that bag of chips. Comparing it to smoking and how that has become over the years acceptable to show no sympathy for the person and to give them a lecture of "you shouldn't do that". People need to take responsibility for their decisions and choose wisely and get of their butt once in a while. [/ QUOTE ] All people with greater that 25% body fat need to stand at least 50 feet from any public entrance while eating.

November 5th, 2004, 10:56	#29
tonyw Old Skool Join Date: May 2002 Location: Maryland Posts: 15,616	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs Yes and no. Look, we've danced all around the topic but we've never come down to the bottom line. It doesn't matter if it's from carbs, protein, or fat. All the focus on low fat, low carbs, low this, low that is missing the point. If you take in less calories than you burn, you will lose weight. If you take in more calories than you burn, you will gain weight. Now, when you're drinking the high fructose corn syrup that ADM produces in your super big gulp, how many calories is that? About 1,000? That's about half of the daily recommended caloric intake. That's the problem. The high fructose corn syrup is part of the problem, but people consuming too much of it is the main problem.

November 5th, 2004, 11:13	#30
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs [ QUOTE ] If you take in less calories than you burn, you will lose weight. If you take in more calories than you burn, you will gain weight. [/ QUOTE ] More getting to the brass-tacks. [ QUOTE ] That's the problem. The high fructose corn syrup is part of the problem, but people consuming too much of it is the main problem. [/ QUOTE ] Every food is caloric or fattening in some way or another. The person's self control (or not) is the bottom line.

November 5th, 2004, 11:28	#31
flyover Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,389	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs Sorry but too simplistic. The things that fructose does to your body, and the things that protein does to your body (or require of your organs) are not the same thing. That's why I think the link between the diabetes epidemic and the fructose onslaught will be confirmed, and it's not just about how many calories of fructose you consume. The huge spike in diabetes and the transition to fructose are direct correlations. The reason there hasn't been a general alarm is the above discussed special interests. As has been said food recommendations are all politics and almost no science. So when you push the "it's just the number of calories, it's not what you eat" line you are in agreement with the major food processors who do not want you to look at fructose. And BTW, of special interest to pilots, is the fact that every time Atkins style diets have been put against American Heart Association diets the Atkins diet reduces cholesterol and artery hardening more effectively. The AHA is fighting this like mad. But I think, like diabetes, heart disease will be found to be linked more to carbohydrate intake than fat intake. (I'm not a scientist but I have a reservation at a Holiday Inn Express). So we may finally figure out why spaghetti eating, running pioneer Jim Fixx died of a massive heart attack. Of course, over the years since then, everytime a high-carbohydrate advocating exerciser has a heart attack it's blamed on genetics (so they've got that going for them, which is good). We'll figure this diet thing out someday. Hopefully it will be found that beer and wings are the nectar of health.

November 5th, 2004, 11:29	#32
Ophir Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: was Ophir, CO, now in SLC! Posts: 1,481	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs And consumer spending habits are where the focus can go too. If people don't like what ADM and Monsanto are doing then don't buy their goods. They will get the picture really quickly. But the problem is people's apathy; they don't care. They want the companies not provide them with a quick solution to their inability to restrain their eating habits. They don't want to read labels and find out what is good for you and what isn't. They don't want someone telling them that what they are doing in their life is distructive because it is their liberty to be self-destructive, that is until they become a burden on everyone else. They want the government to regulate bad food and drugs but they don't want bigger government. They want to take more money home in taxes and want the government out of their lives but bitch when corporations, how have the same mandate, take advantage of their insatisible appetites for self-destruction. Wake up and take charge of your life, it is the only true asset you will ever have.

November 5th, 2004, 12:23	#33
adreamer Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: AZO Posts: 1,370	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs I am going to say something about this topic since I have study some of obesity issues. I agree with TonyW. I really do not care about what you eat. The bottom line is if you put in more than you burn, you will gain few extra pounds. Human body design is about the same as few thousand years ago. Therefore, your body burn energy intake in this order: Carb. Proteins, and Fat. All diets are manipulation of this system. For example, low carb diet, it basically takes out carb of your intake. In this case, your body have to burn protein, then fat. First, what does extra pound mean? In this world, you will obey the law of physics wether you like it or not. It means it does cost more fuel to make takeoff. Try to think about 100 people average weight about 180 lbs vs. 100 people who average weigh about 250 lbs. That is a 7000 lbs difference. I believe airplane can achieve Vr a little quicker. Second, if you have heart attack, knee replacement surgery, or high blood pressure because of your weight, how much money do you think overall the medical cost on you alone? I promise you will not pay all of it. I can give you a figure from my previous job experience. When you walk into E.R, before doc even look at you and not riding ambulance, that is a 50 ~ 80 dollars registration fee. X ray is about 100 dollars. What about open heart surgery? Who pick the rest of your bill? My suggestion is to check and write down your diet. Go ahead, write down what you have for the next week. You will be surprised. For JCers, if my memory serve me correct, high blood pressure can ground you in a heart beat. adreamer

November 5th, 2004, 12:25	#34
PaulThomas Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Naples, FL KAPF Posts: 46	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs [ QUOTE ] Fuel burn increases by as much as 10% of what ever weight you add. Many variables, such as stage length, but it works out to between 6 and 10%. I use 10% as my rough gouge for adding weight, be it fuel or what ever. What that means is that if you have 100 more pounds, you burn 10 pounds more fuel. If you have 200 pax that after 20 pounds more each, that means you've burned 400 more pounds of fuel. That's 60 gallons. And I bet that we're talking about more weight/person than 20 pounds, plus the extra stuff people carry with them.... [/ QUOTE ] And then you have to add gas because you're carrying more gas which is weight...

November 5th, 2004, 12:49	#35
Sprint100 Old Skool Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Santa Clarita, CA Posts: 6,152	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The federal government has declared war on fat people. [/ QUOTE ] You mean like the war on drugs, the war on poverty, or the war on terra? We've seen how effective those are. [/ QUOTE ] Didn't you catch the headlines? Fat people are now a part of the axis of evil!

November 5th, 2004, 12:52	#36
Lurker Posts: n/a	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs Nevermind, TheWife said it (be charged by the pound)

November 5th, 2004, 13:38	#37
tonyw Old Skool Join Date: May 2002 Location: Maryland Posts: 15,616	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs They just did a piece on this on CNBC. They had a guy I know pretty well representing the airlines' prespective and some woman who works for the National Association for Fat Acceptance or some wacko group like that. The guy I know had a great line -- when you're trying to fight gravity, weight is not your friend.

November 5th, 2004, 15:50	#38
Sprint100 Old Skool Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Santa Clarita, CA Posts: 6,152	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs [ QUOTE ] National Association for Fat Acceptance [/ QUOTE ] Whatever the name may be, I am still laughing that they have an "organized" group like that.

November 5th, 2004, 16:06	#39
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 41,164 Blog Entries: 1	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs I was watching "The View" as I was shaving this morning and Star Jones, ("I'm Star and I'm a LO'yuh") thought it was some conspiracy to raise ticket prices. This is a rough paraphrase but she said something to the extent of "We already pay too much to fly. Now they want to use this as an excuse to get mo [sic] money out of us. What's an average plan carry, 400 people? Well, if we're all ten pounds heavier, you can't tell me it takes mo [sic] gas to fly an extra 40,000 lbs. It's just sick". Not only is she not a math whiz, she perhaps has no concept that an extra 4,000 lbs is equivalent to an extra 25 people by using the FAA's current (old?) average pax weight. Math and science in public. Recipe for disaster!

November 5th, 2004, 16:51	#40
JDMcFly Old Skool Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New York Posts: 1,666	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs Whats wrong with increased airline ticket prices? It needs to happen across the board.

November 5th, 2004, 17:29	#41
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 41,164 Blog Entries: 1	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs I know. Just another celeb talking out of her ass!

November 5th, 2004, 18:06	#42
tonyw Old Skool Join Date: May 2002 Location: Maryland Posts: 15,616	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs And in the case of that particular celebrity, there is plenty of ass to talk out of.

November 5th, 2004, 18:13	#43
QXDVR Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 112	Re: Feds: Obesity Raising Airline Fuel Costs I saw that on the news this morn and its interesting timing because our new Weight and Balance program increases the weight of pax so we can't even fly full anymore on our smaller planes. So much for the benefit of a jumpseat. STOP EATING!!!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode