What is your point???

My point was not to judge whether the health objectives were good or bad. (They are fine as far as I am concerned). It is that they want to suck tax payer money to achieve them.

1) Health on the platter will not be of value to a consumer
2) They spend lots of money and increase their expenditure and will go full circle to realize that a, they can't afford it and b, actually the more control the individual has the better the decisions he will make over his own health.

Incentive to better living requires it to be of value. Having no safety net will certainly make this a priority for most people.
Having to pay for their own health care, will force the individual to economize and make decisions about what the best alternative will be. This will give incentive to low SES populations to educate themselves to get the best deal and to live healthier lives.

These goals are achievable but not with the existing philosophies [psychiatry, psychology, sociology criminology etc] which have shown over the past 30yrs that their success rate is less than placebo effect.[85% recidivism rate] I suppose if the taxpayer funds it all and you can keep the monies whether you get a result or not, that's one hell of a gravy train for one to ride??

Are We Being Unkind To Psychiatrists [full article]
http://www.rehabilitatenz.co.nz/pages4/psychiatrists.html

Consider this scenario: You run a business and you are concerned about drug abuse, as it is affecting about two percent of your employees. You read in the newspaper about a fellow whose job it is to handle this problem. And he must be pretty successful, because the article says other businesses have paid him millions. You interview him and he tells you that he is an authority on drug abuse and will take care of it for you. No problem. So you hire him.

A year later, 20 percent of your employees have a drug problem. The original two percent still take drugs, but they are legal, prescription drugs. It doesn't matter to you—they are still too stoned and out of it to work.

So you call in the expert and ask why, after paying him half-a-million dollars, give or take a few cents, you now have a more serious drug problem in your company?

The 13 health objectives below are what this government will be interested in throwing funding, strategies and legislation, to support those outcomes:
1) Reduce smoking
2) Improve nutrition
3) Increase the level of physical activity
4) Reduce the rate of suicides and suicide attempts
5) Minimize harm caused by alcohol and illicit and other drug use to individuals and the community
6)Reduce the incidence and impact of cancer
7) Reduce the incidence and impact of cardiovascular disease
8 ) Improve oral health
9) Reduce violence in interpersonal relationships, families, schools,and communities
10) Improve the health status of people with sever mental illness
11) ensure access to appropriate child health care services, including well child and family health care and immunization.
12) Ensure accessible and appropriate services for people from lower socioeconomic groups
12)Ensure accessible and appropriate services for Maori ensure accessible and appropriate services for Pacific peoples.

To continue Kasper's thoughts, let no Kiwi SOLOist think this will not happen here. Quoted directly from today's Beehive Update (my highlights).

Healthy Eating Healthy Action plan for Southland

Posted: 30 Jul 2008 09:19 PM CDT

A new plan aiming to improve nutrition, increase physical activity and reduce obesity in Southland was launched by Associate Health Minister Damien O’Connor today.

The Southland Healthy Eating - Healthy Action (HEHA) Plan is part of the Southland District Health Board and whole community response to the obesity epidemic in their region, and sets a number of nutritional and physical goals for the people of Southland to achieve.

Mr O’Connor said the launch of the Southland HEHA Plan is an important milestone.

“This is a true reflection of what is trying to be achieved nationally, in terms of including all sectors and communities in the government’s response to the obesity epidemic.

"The Southland HEHA Plan sets out to achieve a number of goals, which include increased fruit and vegetable consumption, increased breastfeeding rates, increased rates of physical activity participation and improving nutrition,” said Mr O'Connor.

The 2006/2007 New Zealand Health Survey launched last month shows that one in three kiwi adults are overweight and a further one in four adults were obese. While the 2002/2003 New Zealand Health Survey found that 59 percent of Southlanders were overweight or obese and that Southland Maori are more likely to be obese or overweight, updated data for the Southland region will be available in the next couple of months.

“The Labour-led government committed to helping New Zealanders improve their nutrition, increase physical activity and maintain healthier lifestyles. This year’s Budget committed $52 million over the next four years to several initiatives aimed at improving nutrition and fighting obesity.

Mr O'Connor said DHBs around the country are coming up with local solutions for their own communities, to improve the nutrition and physical activity levels of their populations and ultimately reduce the number of New Zealanders who are overweight and obese.

"Whilst today is a milestone not only for the Southland DHB and the Southland community, the challenge of reducing obesity is a great one and work must continue all over the country to improve these statistics,” said Mr O'Connor.

Again, the Ministry of Health is thinking of doing this here. I can't even walk into Food town, now called Countdown, without being told to eat my 5 fruits and drink water. It's disgusting!

To design an effective plan to help people loose weight so many other things could be done! Activists could put pressure on fast food joints to offer healthier menus, consumer demand could put pressure on restaurants to put calorie counts on their menus. Blaming the productive will only cause resentment and oppression of business. Why not form companies which could intensify the 'consumer voice'? These companies would be an asset for the consumer and a huge asset for the productive. The productive would have free market research delivered to their door step about what the next selling marketing strategy would be.

Incentives for exercise could take place within health insurance policies. Point systems which correlate with health risk could be designed. The research on the relationship between exercise and certain morbidities has already been produced!

This has already been achieved without legislation in other areas such as housing equipment. Environmentally friendly water catching systems from spouting, insulation, heating, lighting, floor materials - the list goes on! When looking at buying a house you have a star energy rating system.

Also in cars there is a fuel efficiency system for the consumer to see.

Bottom line is that if health is delivered, as present, on a platter whereby that big box of concrete is the place you go to if your sick. Then why would you give a damn? Simple, you wouldn't.

Submitted to Real Clear Politics go there now to vote for the article. Unfortunately you can't link directly to the SOLO submission, only the "reader's articles" page, so you may need to search for it.

10 votes gets the SOLO submission bumped to the front page and drives traffic back to here.

You need to register to vote, if you haven't already done so you can register here.