Japan enforces legal limit on waistlines.

  • auryn

    Posts: 2061

    Jun 16, 2008 9:47 PM GMT
    "Under a national law that came into effect two months ago, companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of their annual checkups. That represents more than 56 million waistlines, or about 44 percent of the entire population.

    Those exceeding government limits — 33.5 inches for men and 35.4 inches for women, which are identical to thresholds established in 2005 for Japan by the International Diabetes Federation as an easy guideline for identifying health risks — and having a weight-related ailment will be given dieting guidance if after three months they do not lose weight. If necessary, those people will be steered toward further re-education after six more months."

    The rest here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2008 11:11 PM GMT
    Uh-oh I better do more cardio b4 visiting Japan 'cuz I am between 33-34 inch waist size and under 6 feet tall icon_eek.gif
  • auryn

    Posts: 2061

    Jun 16, 2008 11:14 PM GMT
    bill007 saidUh-oh I better do more cardio b4 visiting Japan 'cuz I am between 33-34 inch waist size and under 6 feet tall icon_eek.gif


    If you don't you won't be able to find any pants to fit you unless you go to Takeshita Dori or Omotesando. icon_wink.gif
  • zakariahzol

    Posts: 2241

    Jun 16, 2008 11:16 PM GMT
    Wow, that a good law. They need to introduce those law in my country. Obesity have be come a problem here due to higher income and inactive lifesyle. If I cant keep my hand off those fried chicken, they need to sent me to some bootcamp for re education. Great Ideas.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    Jun 16, 2008 11:27 PM GMT
    This would be a great law for the good ol USA due to our serious problems with obesity and little physical activity. Probably the first thing that needs to be outlawed in the USA are all these fast food drive thrus. What the Japanese are doing in their fight against obesity is something Americans should follow by implementing similar laws. There are too many Americans that are overweight and in deteriorating health.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2008 11:29 PM GMT
    It's not COMPLETELY a bad idea/concept....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2008 11:36 PM GMT
    Y'all must really love the idea of a police state.

    ("Hello, 911? I saw my neighbor eating a BIG MAC. Oh, and you'd better bring a SWAT team. He may have doughnuts too.")
  • irishboxers

    Posts: 357

    Jun 17, 2008 12:24 AM GMT
    jprichva saidY'all must really love the idea of a police state.

    ("Hello, 911? I saw my neighbor eating a BIG MAC. Oh, and you'd better bring a SWAT team. He may have doughnuts too.")


    Agreed. I'm a believer of taking responsibility for your actions, even if that action is doing arm curls with a Big Mac. There's no one to blame but yourself if you develop health problems from a bad diet. No one is forcing you to eat the bad food -- you're choosing to eat it, and suing McDonalds because you chose not to notice the fat and calories is not a valid course of action.

    Big brother should worry more about regulating the credit and oil industries and not about who's muffin-topping their 501s.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    Jun 17, 2008 12:35 AM GMT
    Taking full responsibility for one's own actions is all fine and dandy but when they cannot afford health care costs when they become seriously ill, who do these so-called free, responsible Americans cry to for financial help? answer they look to the government to bail them out of their health care crisis. So much for being responsible and standing on your own two feet.
  • irishboxers

    Posts: 357

    Jun 17, 2008 12:44 AM GMT
    Again, the product of their actions. Should the government try to help with some sort of national heathcare? Sure, but if 34 inches is the national waistline the NFL is gonna be on probation.

    Humans are, for lack of a better way of saying it, stupid animals that learn from their mistakes or sensing their own harm. It takes a scare to get the message across.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 1:57 AM GMT
    Well, that would never happen here. Although I kinda wish it would. The perverse side of me would probably enjoy it. . .

    If I had my way, a man's waist could not exceed 30.

    29 waist w/six pack: $2,000 annual tax deduction

    28 waist w/six pack: $5,000 annual tax deduction

    But:

    31 waist: on "probation"

    32 waist: "re-education, 1st phase": weekly weigh-ins, diet and fitness instruction

    33: "re-education, 2nd phase": daily weigh-ins, mandatory exercise and restricted diet with one-on-one supervision by IRS-trained government employee; still allowed to maintain job and live at home. Patient gets slapped around a little.

    34: "re-education, 3rd phase": shipped off to nearby correctional facility for severely restricted diet and exercise regimen; mandatory psychiatric counseling. Patient gets smacked around, frequently.

    35: deemed incorrigible. Deported.

    For women, the standards would start at 24 inches, with a $2,000 tax deduction for a 23 inch waist, etc.

    ---------------------------------------------------

    Actually, the tax deduction for healthy guys makes some sense. Think about it -- a $2,000-$5,000 tax deduction to encourage people to stay exceptionally healthy. . .

    . . . that's PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR compared to the billions spent on health care for people who simply refuse to do minimal maintenance on themselves.

    We offer tax credits for people who buy solar panels and hot water heaters because they don't overburden our energy grid. . . why not some sort of tax credit for people who don't overburden the health care system?



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 2:14 AM GMT
    Nothing to steer people towards hating a healthy lifestyle like martial law. That's sick that the government has taken such measures. Maybe they lack faith in the people to govern themselves, but they probably don't have a democracy in Japan, right?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 2:15 AM GMT
    great idea... icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 2:22 AM GMT
    LittleDudeWithMuscles saidIf I had my way, a man's waist could not exceed 30.

    29 waist w/six pack: $2,000 annual tax deduction

    28 waist w/six pack: $5,000 annual tax deduction

    But:

    31 waist: on "probation"

    32 waist: "re-education, 1st phase": weekly weigh-ins, diet and fitness instruction

    33: "re-education, 2nd phase": daily weigh-ins, mandatory exercise and restricted diet with one-on-one supervision by IRS-trained government employee; still allowed to maintain job and live at home. Patient gets slapped around a little.




    Are you freaking kidding me? the only way that would work is if people were all as short as you are. I am 6'05" and if I had a 29 inch waist I would look like I was wasting away. I have a 32 inch waist and that is about the smallest anyone my height is gonna get without having their hip bones shaved off..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 2:27 AM GMT
    jjdayz said[quote][cite]



    Are you freaking kidding me? the only way that would work is if people were all as short as you are. I am 6'05" and if I had a 29 inch waist I would look like I was wasting away. I have a 32 inch waist and that is about the smallest anyone my height is gonna get without having their hip bones shaved off..[/quote]

    ----------------------------------------------------

    Read it and weep, jjdayz.

    And me no likey your attitude.

    You tall guys have had it your way for WAY too long.

    There's no reason why someone 6'5" couldn't have a 29 waist. Or even a 28, 27. . . 26 waist. Have you EVER REALLY TRIED???? I bet you haven't. icon_neutral.gif

    Besides, under my plan, it just means you wouldn't get a tax credit.

    And why should I care if a guy who 6'5" gets a tax credit, tall guys like you get ALL the breaks anyway.

    With your 32 waist, you'd be in "re-education, 1st phase", which reads:

    daily weigh-ins, mandatory exercise and restricted diet with one-on-one supervision by IRS-trained government employee; still allowed to maintain job and live at home. Patient gets slapped around a little.

    What's wrong with that?? icon_biggrin.gif







  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 2:47 AM GMT
    he he he!!! Well the smacking around isn't so bad, but actually it's impossible for someone with my bone structure to get into anything below a 32" waist. My waist isn't actually that big, but in order to fit hips and arse into jeans it requires a much bigger fit. It's just a fact of life!! I haven't had a smaller then 32" waist since 6th grade when i hit 5'02"

    Besides us tall guys are supposed to have it our ways, that's why we are tall. It's not fair for you short guys to get all the muscles with half the work as us tall guys so we are supposed to get things our way!!!

    icon_twisted.gif
  • MSUBioNerd

    Posts: 1813

    Jun 17, 2008 12:01 PM GMT
    Speaking as one who might get a tax credit under LittleDude's plan (my waist is 29 inches, but I don't have a 6 pack), I can still say it's a foolish plan. Not only does it not take height and bone structure and age into account, and is way too strict, it makes the faulty assumption that thinner is always better. Definitely not the case, from either a health or a beauty angle

    20080227154609990004 is not a look I think we should be promoting.

    Pragmatically, of course, such a policy may well lead to higher health care costs. One of the most common triggers for weight gain: giving up smoking. Nicotine is also an appetite suppressant, which is one of the reasons so many female models smoke. As mentioned in the article, cutting smoking rates in Japan would save far more money on health expenditures than current obesity problems, especially given how trim the country is in general. High blood pressure and cancer are just not comparable.

    As far as the actual policy goes, it's also way too strict. It also strikes me as curious that in Japan women can have larger waist sizes than men and not be considered at risk for diabetes, while in the US men can have much larger waist sizes than women before they become at risk.

    And as for banning fast food? No. No no no. Not only is it a case of blaming others instead of the person who has the weight problem, it's also unfair to those who don't have a weight problem. Thank goodness the gradual erosion of liberty and personal responsibility haven't come to that yet here. Even though it might be a RealJock heresy, I admit: I like French fries. Sometimes I even go into a fast food joint, order fries, and eat them. With normal range blood pressure, low cholesterol, and being if anything underweight, why shouldn't I be able to go eat fries if I want to?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 12:53 PM GMT
    I read about this a few years back. I think it was on Reader's Digest or some other similar magazine.

    Trouble In Paradise

    Nauru and Tonga should have this law. icon_razz.gif

    MSUBioNerdThank goodness the gradual erosion of liberty and personal responsibility haven't come to that yet here.


    I admit it's a bit ominous. And yeah the waistline limit is arbitrary. icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 2:32 PM GMT
    jjdayz said[quote][cite]LittleDudeWithMuscles said[/cite]If I had my way, a man's waist could not exceed 30.

    29 waist w/six pack: $2,000 annual tax deduction

    28 waist w/six pack: $5,000 annual tax deduction

    But:

    31 waist: on "probation"

    32 waist: "re-education, 1st phase": weekly weigh-ins, diet and fitness instruction

    33: "re-education, 2nd phase": daily weigh-ins, mandatory exercise and restricted diet with one-on-one supervision by IRS-trained government employee; still allowed to maintain job and live at home. Patient gets slapped around a little.




    Are you freaking kidding me? the only way that would work is if people were all as short as you are. I am 6'05" and if I had a 29 inch waist I would look like I was wasting away. I have a 32 inch waist and that is about the smallest anyone my height is gonna get without having their hip bones shaved off..[/quote]

    I'm 6'4 with a 30 inch hip and a 28 inch waist... but I am wasting away... icon_redface.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 3:56 PM GMT
    Jrdnstatz said[quote][cite]jjdayz said[/cite][quote][cite]LittleDudeWithMuscles said[/cite]If I had my way, a man's waist could not exceed 30.

    29 waist w/six pack: $2,000 annual tax deduction

    28 waist w/six pack: $5,000 annual tax deduction

    But:

    31 waist: on "probation"

    32 waist: "re-education, 1st phase": weekly weigh-ins, diet and fitness instruction

    33: "re-education, 2nd phase": daily weigh-ins, mandatory exercise and restricted diet with one-on-one supervision by IRS-trained government employee; still allowed to maintain job and live at home. Patient gets slapped around a little.




    Are you freaking kidding me? the only way that would work is if people were all as short as you are. I am 6'05" and if I had a 29 inch waist I would look like I was wasting away. I have a 32 inch waist and that is about the smallest anyone my height is gonna get without having their hip bones shaved off..[/quote]

    I'm 6'4 with a 30 inch hip and a 28 inch waist... but I am wasting away... icon_redface.gif[/quote]

    Notice I said "I would look like I was wasting away." I did not say all guys my height. I was directing that comment to my own personal body type and bone structure not as a generalization that everyone tall would look like they are wasting away.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 4:00 PM GMT
    jprichva saidY'all must really love the idea of a police state.

    ("Hello, 911? I saw my neighbor eating a BIG MAC. Oh, and you'd better bring a SWAT team. He may have doughnuts too.")

    LMFAO!!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 4:15 PM GMT
    wow, that picture posted almost made me throw up.

    I say, do away with that law, because really, i have friends who are size 34, size 36, etc, and theyre in better shape than me and im a size 31. Its whatever your body structure determines, and you wouldnt find me or any other rational people in line for hip shaving (gag reflux induced again). If they want to introduce a new criteria, make it body fat levels.

    I do agree with the tax credit for something like low body fat levels because it shows that you are truly leading a healthy lifestyle. In Canada (where i go to school) we pay taxes that contribute to the national healthcare system and to know that im footing the bill for tubby to eat another tube of pringles as a "midnight snack"...well, i disagree.
  • auryn

    Posts: 2061

    Jun 17, 2008 4:30 PM GMT
    Um, not to ruin the fun some of you are having with this, but let's not forget that Japanese people aren't always as tall or stout as other folks.

    When I went to Tokyo with my boyfriend, I was amazed to not see but a few people that would be considered average here but were portly there, and I was one of them. I tried on a pair of size 30 pants in Shinjuku and couldn't get them over my ass. The pants were cute and I lamented the fact that I couldn't bring them home. Fortunately, we went to Omotesando and I bought a couple pair of jeans, that actually got around my ample booty, that were also sized 29. (Thank God there was an FCUK there.)

    I've always thought that if I ever ballooned beyond a size 31 that I should be put to sleep.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 4:55 PM GMT
    I think it is a great idea "for Japan". I would love to see the majority of guys with a 29" waist squat 495 lbs. Not saying that guys with a 50" waist can but you should get what I am saying. Americans are built bigger for the most part so Japan's law would not work here. Personally I think I look great with my 34" waist but then again I am 6'1 200 lbs and am proportioned with the rest of my body minus a little needed muscle on my legs.icon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2008 5:06 PM GMT
    irishboxers saidAgain, the product of their actions. Should the government try to help with some sort of national heathcare? Sure, but if 34 inches is the national waistline the NFL is gonna be on probation.

    Humans are, for lack of a better way of saying it, stupid animals that learn from their mistakes or sensing their own harm. It takes a scare to get the message across.

    For example, when they can no longer fit you in the Abercrombie store and have to refer you to the Sansabelt rack. Very scary indeed.