Politically Incorrect: Americans are Fat

Introduction

I wrote this entry about a month ago, but held off publishing it because it's somewhat mean spirited and the observations made are important but in a limited sense. In fact, they are (as usual) quite obvious observations, but nobody seems to connect the dots and put things together publicly. So leave it to me to state the obvious while upsetting folks. It's what I do. In the time since this was written, President Trump has been hospitalized, then released, with Covid-19. I'm going to publish this now, while he appears on the road to recovery and the observations herein don't have some postmortem cruelty to them. I'll post this as originally written, then add a few end comments.

Politically Incorrect:  Americans are Fat

Americans are fat, and it matters. It matters in many ways that never get mentioned on CNN, Fox News, or your local five o'clock broadcast. Americans' fatness matters politically, but it's considered so rude, so gauche, so politically incorrect, that nobody discusses it.

Allow me, then. In one of my first blog entries, I stated that my goal in life is to offend as many people as possible in the time I have left. I'm a man of my word.

It's debatable, however, whether I should be the person pointing out how obesity informs and permeates the United States. I am, after all, somewhere between 15 and 25 pounds above my optimal weight, depending on which formal medical measuring stick is applied. American standards are the kindest, of course, so I tend to quote these. I'm considered 15 pounds beyond where I should be, at least in the states. I am capable, however, of dropping that between now and the election, so I will get to it. But first, allow me to explore the various ways in which American fatness has obvious political effects that never surface in polite conversation.

American Obesity

At the turn of the century, the American obesity rate was a shade above 30%. Since then, according to the CDC, the U.S. obesity rate has climbed to more than 42%. Severe or morbid obesity increased over the same period from 4.7% to 9.2%. Think about that. Almost one in ten Americans is morbidly obese. To put this in an international perspective, as of 2016, the United States trailed ten Pacific island nations and Kuwait in obesity rates. Since then, Americans have easily overtaken Kuwait. Other than the constituents of these South and Mid Pacific nations, Americans are now the fattest people in the world.

Americans tend to not focus on or publicize these facts. With the advent of Covid-19, however, the reality of the U.S. leading the non-island world in obesity has taken on new importance. The ubiquity of American obesity has led to some fascinating, underappreciated political consequences.

Ignoring Obesity

For all of President Trump's aggressive, bullying behavior in primary debates, general election debates, and general discourse, it's been a cultural curiosity that no one has deemed it appropriate to return fire of like kind. He's leaned on attack monikers like Sleepy Joe, Little Marco, Lyin' Ted Cruz, Crooked Hilary, Low Energy Jeb, Pocahontas, and so on. The interesting thing to me is that nobody at odds with Trump assigns him the most obvious nicknames, which would reference his weight. Looking at the president, one is forced to admit that he's obese. My opinion, based on comparing both still photos and live footage, is that the man has gained at least 20-25 pounds since assuming office. Cheeseburgers and eight-hour stints watching Fox News tends to do that. Wearing heavy duty Spanx can't hide the newly minted extra poundage. Other than a one-time Nancy Pelosi dig, however, nobody incorporates Trump's obesity into nicknames or criticisms. 

Forty years ago, "Slim" was a common enough nickname-as-dig, but Trump hasn't even been crowned with that rather mild disapprobation. Political opponents drawing attention to the president's weight problem is noticeable by its very absence.

I have several key obesity observations I'd like to make. First of all, I think the reason most people give Trump a pass on his weight is because 40% of the American public is, like Trump, obese. So while the president can mock the disabled, or joke about height, the obvious retort of shining a spotlight on Trump's weight carries too much of an American political downside. If 40% of Americans are obese, then pointing out that the president is woefully obese may have no effect other than to bond the obese citizenry with an obese leader. Thus, Trump's most glaring physical characteristic becomes a non-issue. My suspicion is that in an Asian country, where obesity rates are much lower, a bombastic leader such as Trump would have garnered half a dozen weight-related nicknames.

Mask-Wearing and Obesity

Instead of once again reviewing the effects of obesity during a pandemic and the demography of American obesity, which I've discussed in previous entries, I'm going to go in an entirely different direction. What I'm about to say will, after I say it, appear obvious and banal. It does not, however, get mentioned in polite company, so I'll discuss it here.

Americans have been at war regarding the wearing of masks, with red state citizens interpreting the wearing of masks as some kind of political heraldry. Americans have resisted mask-wearing more than any other population. Americans are also the fattest population. I think that these facts are connected.

Two-thirds of Americans are overweight. More than 40% are obese. Lugging around an extra 25-40 pounds every second of every day is not an easy chore. Breathing while lugging that extra poundage can be a test, especially when carrying things or using stairs. Wearing a mask restricts your breathing. The effect is minimal unless you're working out, but carrying around an extra 25-40 pounds is certainly a workout. 

Try jogging two miles wearing a mask, and then jog two miles without. It's a lot easier without. Well, if that's the case, then assuredly everything is easier without a mask. You breathe more easily.

As an old distance runner who has done considerable formal training, I can also vouch for the effects of added weight. Carrying around an additional 25-40 pounds, as I did during a fair number of workouts while wearing weight vests, is flat out hard. Put a mask on and wear a weight vest, and you have a real challenge, which is what all of these obese Americans are facing. A big chunk of extra weight and mask-wearing is a no-fun combination. 

Now I'll throw some additional statistics at you, and you can make of them what you will. Obesity increases as education decreases. That's a clear cut and dramatic correlation. Among whites, Trump support increases as education decreases. That is also a clear cut correlation. Finally, those red states where mask-wearing has had difficulty becoming standard practice (it was 15% in Tennessee three months ago), have higher obesity rates than the states with higher percentages of people wearing masks. Coincidences? Correlations? Causes-and-effects? 

What I just laid out is as obvious as the grass is green, yet it doesn't get discussed in the national conversation.

Role Models

Seventy-nine year old Dr. Fauci and his wife jog four miles several times a week. I suspect that the doctor has a hard time getting into the head of obese, undereducated Trump supporters who refuse to wear masks while lugging around weight vests made of flesh. And I'm sure the obese, undereducated Trumpsters view Fauci as some alien creature partly because the doctor doesn't seem to grasp the hassle of mask-wearing for some.

Fauci has tried to set one example, but he's alien to the Trumpsters. The president, on the other hand, is a non-jogging, porcine fellow who mirrors their own obesity. Who do you think they see as their natural leader? 

These are some of the social psychological dynamics currently in progress in the United States. They are obvious, and they have cost lives. It's time they should be examined and discussed.

 Political correctness be damned.

Postscript

In the month since I wrote this, I've managed to lose all of three pounds. I went jogging today, wearing a mask. Although I'm sure the actual reduction in air intake is less than 10%, it's certainly harder to jog with a mask. It is, however, a small price to pay for additional safety. 

Bob Dietz

October 7, 2020

And on the Third Day, He Rose . . .

 . . . from his hospital bed in Walter Reed and, via chopper, headed back to the White House.

I suppose if you're going to head a religion, you may as well go the whole nine yards with metaphor and optics. 

It turned out, as early as my last entry was written, I got most things right. Hope Hicks was, predictably, not likely to have been the source of the president's positivity. As soon as her positive diagnosis became public, I figured the president was already infected. I was correct. Hicks was willing to fall on her sword for Trump, but then more positives occurred, the super spreader event at the Rose Garden was uncovered, and the first wave of lies went to hell.

Think about the sleazy narrative that President Trump tried to sell. Hicks had, he stated, been touching and hugging and talking closely with first responders and folks in the military. That was undoubtedly the source of her infection. And she was the likely source of the president's positive. Yeah, that was the ticket.

Until, of course, it was not. Instead, it was a GOP event flouting CDC and task force recommendations. Flouting really isn't a strong enough word. Thumbing its nose at CDC and task force recommendations is more accurate.

So now we have a medicinally gooned up president telling people to not let Covid-19 dominate their lives, even as he gasps for air while an array of pharmaceuticals unavailable to the public courses through his veins. Vice-President Pence, meanwhile, should be in quarantine. Instead he wants to appear at tomorrow night's scheduled debate. Chris Christie checks himself into a hospital after his positive diagnosis. Perhaps he could use a pep talk from the president so he could head home and not allow the virus to dominate his life.

Reality versus the GOP. Guess who's winning?

The interesting aspect to come will be watching the president deal with Covid-19 on a daily basis for the next few weeks. As a 74-year-old in terrible physical shape despite being an avid lover of golf and Spanx, he is going to have to shoot a bunch of videos today or tomorrow so he can distribute them in the weeks ahead as the steroids wear off and he feels like hell.

Sixty-five million people voted for this guy. The same guy who routinely called into tabloids and radio shows to anonymously tout his own sex life. The guy who bankrupted four casinos. The dude who was involved in two lawsuits a week for more than 30 years. And nobody vetted his finances or his dependence on Russian oligarchs backing a bank. 

If this was and is our process for choosing leaders in this country, Americans got the president we deserved. To paraphrase Dean Wormer in Animal House, "Fat, stupid, and drunk on hubris is no way to go through life, Americans." The United States has four weeks to slim down, smarten up, and get humble.

The clock is ticking.

Bob Dietz

October 6, 2020

Galatians 6:7

President Trump and Melania announced that they had tested positive for Covid-19 last night. I find this as surprising as tomorrow's sunrise.

Back on July 4, I commented on the covid-problematic design of the outdoor rally pavilion in South Dakota. Given the president's fondness for rallies sans face masks and social distancing, his positive test was just a matter of time.

Falling on your sword while completing a year of anti-science proclamations and high risk behavior is one thing. That harms only yourself. If initial reports are true, however, and Trump risked infecting donors after Hope Hicks' diagnosis, and if the Trump campaign failed to alert Biden of the positive tests...well, that is (once again) a level of irresponsibility almost beyond belief. It's as if the president is hell bent on doing as much damage as possible in the months he has left in office. At times, it appears that Putin possesses Trump like Pazuzu possessed Regan in The Exorcist.

Call me cynical. I figured as soon as Hicks' positive test was announced that the president had already tested positive. I suspect that if the president had tested negative, Ms. Hicks might have taken a long vacation due to, as the president tweeted, her having worked nonstop so many long months. As to whether her Covid-19 diagnosis would have made it to the newsrooms, I'm guessing not immediately. Again, call me overly analytical, but I found the incorporation of "nonstop working" references in the Hicks positive-reveal tweet to possibly be more than coincidental. The president, like many amateur writers, may have had a tweet prepared to explain her imminent "vacation," and was loathe to not use a line already in his mental docket.

In any event, we now have a covid-positive president. The line of infection has been presented as Hicks-to-Trump, but who really knows? She had symptoms Wednesday; he had them Thursday. That is not guaranteed evidence of disease provenance. It's been presented as a gospel chain-of-infection, but the sequence, who gave what to whom, is not a mortal lock at all. So take all current information with a salt shaker.

After the debate debacle Tuesday night, I found a Biden -130 the next morning and bet it, but only for three digits, mainly because I didn't necessarily trust him to live until November 3. Now both candidates are seriously at risk, as we await Biden's test results from his Trump exposure. 

What preventable absurdity comes next? My blog series addressing the U.S. pandemic response is called "Tales from the Asylum." A better title eludes me.

Bob Dietz

October 2, 2020

The Always Right

And I thought the Religious Right was a problem. 

I've felt from the beginning, since that day Trump adolescently bullied Jeb Bush during a debate and the crowd approved, that support for Trump was, for many, a neophyte religion. It was always as the president said in January, 2016 -- he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and his supporters would still be supporters.

The religious nature of Trump support seems to both highlight and explain the dichotomy between Trumpism and science. Trumpism, like communism and other belief systems, cannot really be disconfirmed. If you ask Trump supporters what Trump behavior or piece of evidence would cause them to reject Trump as leader, you'll get a long, long pause. 

Any belief system that immediately diverts disconfirming information into categories of "fake news" or conspiracies is basically impervious to evidence from outside the belief system and extremely intolerant of modification from within. Trumpism serves as a religion, with Donald Trump the only arbiter of truth and what's best for all. Trump's rallies take place in a sacred space. Much of his energy during those rallies is devoted to drawing the inside/outside distinction. Inside the rally is sacred space. Outside is profane corruption. Trump himself occupies a sacred position. Criticism from profane outside forces simply misses the mark because, by definition, a sacred leader cannot be evaluated by profane means or profane outsiders. 

Trump and Trumpism have demonstrated a complete inability or unwillingness to self-correct. Self-correction is viewed as a weakness and, more importantly, as unnecessary because sacred leadership does not require self-correction. Trumpian leadership is both gnostic in nature and divinely inspired. Outsiders simply have no access to the gnosis or the content of the divine inspiration. The profane outsiders are always viewed as trying to decipher and bring down something they not only don't understand, but are unqualified to judge. The devil, whether fake news or the deep state, lacks the pureness to critique the sacred.

Trumpism as Antithetical to Science

During my lifetime (I'm 63), acknowledgement in the political arena of having been wrong or changing one's mind has evolved from evidence of increased information and debate to a complete and utter sin. The evolution has been fast and unidirectional. Policy positions have taken on a religious veneer in that they are almost a kind of permanent commitment requiring a future evasion of rethinking and a radical avoidance of disconfirmation.

In a sense, political positions have been evolving into religious positions requiring fealty and an absolute lack of positional compromise. Trumpism as a religion is a natural outcome of this ongoing American political evolution.

Science, meanwhile, is anathema both to religion and the direction of American politics precisely because science is self-correcting. Self-correction is an indelibly permanent feature of science. Unfortunately for policy-making, this means that self-correcting scientists are viewed as something less, and science is seen by Trumpsters as unstructured and unmoored because it subordinates policy decisions to ongoing analyses of data.

The self-corrective nature of the scientific endeavor places science directly in the cross-hairs of political religiosity. Since self-correction has become so stigmatized in Trumpworld, respect for science literally has no place in it. Fealty to data is not fealty to the sacred. Science finds itself defined as a kind of natural enemy of the Trump religion.

None of this is terribly startling, as policy guided by personalities is always going to generate friction against policy directed by data. In 2020, this friction has become a veritable firestorm. Although lip service is tangentially being paid to data, as when Rand Paul cobbles together some oblique, far-fetched information and tries to jam it into a coherent argument, the fact is that you can almost feel the underlying disdain for appealing to logic or numbers or establishing cause-and-effect. The Trump religion is straining at the bit to just suspend the entire logic charade and impose what they want with minimal concern regarding whether suspension of disbelief becomes a requirement.

The sidestepping, ignoring, and outright lying regarding data during this pandemic has led Scientific American, after 175 years of political neutrality, to endorse Joe Biden for president.

Perhaps the 2020 electoral battle should be framed with somewhat different language. It's not so much red versus blue as it is theocracy versus democracy. And the theocracy has a very human, very Un-Christian leader. 

Bob Dietz

September 25, 2020

Politically Incorrect: The Evangelicals

Superficially, one of the great conundrums of the Trump era appears to be how purported Christian evangelicals can overwhelmingly support a man whose personal history and self presentation have been so, to put it charitably, Un-Christian.

Literally dozens of sexual assault allegations, three marriages sprinkled amidst a lifetime of "grabbing them by the pussy," four thousand lawsuits to squeeze every dollar out of every transaction. The man has suggested the main thing he and his daughter have in common is sex, and he strongly suggested Howard Stern would enjoy dating his daughter. He's built a wall so the meek don't inherit the United States. Not exactly a Matthew 19:14 proponent, he locked up children at the border. 

Yet, of white evangelicals who voted in 2016, 81% voted for Donald Trump. And the projections are in the same ballpark this time around. How can one reconcile the evangelical support for Trump with Trump's lifelong behaviors? The man doesn't really go to church. During his infamous church poseur moment, he looked as familiar with a bible as he might look holding a SAT exam.

From whence the white Christian support for this president? The man, after all, is known both for being in the eye of the storm and in the thighs of a Stormy. And forget about getting a camel through the eye of a needle (Matthew 19: 24). How could this guy possibly get into heaven? It seems superficially preposterous that American white evangelicals would get their mental knickers all twisted trying to support Donald Trump.

But I disagree with those who find evangelical support for the president mysterious. White evangelicals, I argue, are uniquely suited to be ardent Trump supporters.

First off, let's not forget the adjective "white" in front of that "81% white evangelical" phrase. White goes a long way in the United States. It's my reason for choosing to be reincarnated as a U.S. white dude.

Second, let's face it. Christianity is not the most logical, scientific, or humane belief system on the planet. If you spend most of your waking hours swearing fealty to a belief system featuring virgin births, various people coming back from the dead, angels of death slaughtering first borns, fiery tongues entering people, floods wiping out everything except what's on a big boat, and oh yeah, everlasting life...well, I hate to break it to them, but the entire Christian cultural/psychological milieu is a big lie. You're basically living life with a delusion as, at the least, a backdrop that you rarely question. At worst, you're making real world decisions while incorporating fairy tales as rationales for those decisions. And much of the arguments for doing so are "God said this" or "Jesus said that." Authoritarianism to the extreme.

Skip forward a thousand years from the Middle Ages, and here we are. If you can compartmentalize all the Christian lies and nonsense and still function, you're not going to have much of a problem finding ways to compartmentalize everything distasteful or ridiculous about Donald Trump. As a Christian, you've accepted conflicting stories (heck, the gospels have at least two very different storylines), you have been trained for obeisance to canon, and you've learned to keep science off in its corner for huge chunks of your conscious life. It's great training for Trumpism.

An evangelical gung-ho white Christian is primed to be an ardent Trump supporter. All the science-avoiding and logic-evading muscles have been honed. You've swallowed so much evangelical grape Kool-Aid that Trump's lies taste no stronger than plain seltzer. 

As far as resisting disconfirmation, evangelical Christians are notoriously good at it. I mean, when was the last time somebody rose from the dead? It's a couple billion humans ago, if the New Testament or Osiris are to be believed. Not much in the way of fiery tongues or angels of death, either. Yet Christian faith hangs in there.

Given the far out claims of Christianity, it's really impressive that fervent Christians have few issues maintaining their faith. A tad nuts, but impressive nonetheless. Compared to the challenges of Christian belief, it's probably a mere bagatelle for the evangelicals to maintain loyalty to the president. Loyalty is a toned-down version of faith, not requiring as much mental contortionism. All things considered, white evangelical Christians are perfect vessels for the Trump Kool Aid. "Onward Q-Anon Soldiers, Marching Off to War" has a historical ring to it.

When irrational belief systems form the backbone of a culture's mores, then rationality or consistency or meaningful results are not required to hijack the reins of power. You just have to mimic the belief systems. In a sense, you get bonus points for being authoritarian, for being irrational, for requiring faith.

Trump as egg-laying cuckoo in Christianity's nest was an obvious possibility. As long as no Christians asked "Who would Jesus vote for?" the nest was his for the taking.

Bob Dietz

September 16, 2020 

If I Were Woodward

The last two weeks, a handful of people have asked me what I thought of Bob Woodward's Trump tapes. They know I was originally a journalism major at Penn State, and I was hard core on journalistic ethics. You always tell the truth in print, you never give up your sources unless lives are directly and immediately at risk, and so on. In my mind, Spider-Man's classic mantra applies, "With great power comes great responsibility."

I feel that if I had been Woodward, the longest I could have sat on the tapes was the end of March. Too much was at stake. Too many lives in the balance. I would have had too much power to potentially do good in my hands. I'd have felt an overwhelming obligation to tell the American public loudly and clearly that President Trump privately did not believe what he was saying publicly. I would have visited every available media outlet and warned about transmission through the air and the lethality of Covid-19 as at least five times that of a normal flu.

I would have said these things publicly as long and as loud as I could. Book be damned. Election timing be damned. The American public had a right to know so people could protect themselves and plan their lives with maximum information.

That's what I would have done, and it would have been, to me, the only and obvious decision. I could not have even considered delaying for months. The argument can be made that the timing of the tapes' release will have a maximum effect on the election itself. I think that manner of thinking is speculative and besides the point. Saving lives, I believe, takes precedence over maximally influencing the election. 

Further, my suspicion is that Carl Bernstein knew what was on those tapes. In most of his CNN appearances these last months, Bernstein's tone has been declarative regarding Trump, and there's been an underlying ominousness. The declarative nature of Bernstein's proclamations, made without reference to new specific evidence, makes me think that his tone originated in part from knowledge he had in his back pocket. If I'm correct and Bernstein knew the Trump interviews' contents, then again I would have considered myself ethically obligated to go public had I been in Bernstein's shoes, even though the tapes were Woodward's private and intellectual property. Saving lives trumps loyalty to Woodward, and we're talking many, many lives.

The Transactional United States

One angle concerning what Woodward did not do is the overarching transactional theme that permeates the United States' failed Covid-19 responses. The president did what he perceived was best for him and his deluded dream of a monarchical multi-generational Trumpfest-in-charge. The GOP, meanwhile, en masse subordinated the public good and saving lives to the calculus of their individual ambitions. Again, framing the pandemic in a transactional manner.

The cloud regarding the Woodward delay is that holding back the tapes in service of the book has the appearance of putting personal cost/benefit analysis ahead of saving lives. So Woodward's delay risks falling under the aegis of transactionalism. I'm sure this seems, to the rest of the world, as another blatant example of the U.S.'s obsession with individuals' material resources (money) and non-material resources (fame, prestige) at the expense of civics (remember that word?) and public goals. "Civics" has become some extinct freakish idea, relegated to the Smithsonian along with The Fonz's leather jacket and stuffed dodos. Something our grandparents knew about in the 50's.

"The Woodward Delay," as I think journalists a hundred years hence will call it, will be remembered as another inexplicable capital-obsessed selfishness during the era of Trump. Exposing the arch-villain only after he's killed everyone is not the best example of "With great power comes great responsibility." Unless your only responsibility is to yourself.

Bob Dietz

September 16, 2020

Articles of Note -- September 5

Here are some very important articles of note. Please take a look at them.

First is a mention of the www.respectfulinsolence.com blog site that annihilates the recent arguments for hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for Covid-19. He has four pertinent entries debunking the HCQ push:

July 24  "Yale epidemiologist Harvey Risch defends hydroxychloroquine in Newsweek -- badly"

July 29  "Hydroxychloroquine:  The Black Knight of treatments for COVID-19"

August 17  "The astroturf effort promoting hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19                  continues apace"

August 31  "The 'only 6%' gambit: The latest viral COVID-19 disinformation"

These four pieces by "Orac" absolutely clear up any misconceptions and annihilate the pro HCQ disinformation.

Second, I recommend reviewing both the initial reports by Penn State's Dr. Wayne Sebastianelli and the follow-up "clarification" reported on by Timothy Rapp in the September 3 Bleacher Report. Of course Dr. Sebastianelli is walking on eggs here. The Big 10 reportedly is trying to walk back its postponement of football until the spring. Evidently they want a crack at that playoff money.

Finally, Thomas Smith of Elemental contributed "A Supercomputer Analyzed Covid-19 -- and an Interesting New Theory Has Emerged." This piece is also available through Medium.com.

These are great, critical articles to keep abreast of the pandemic. I especially appreciated the August 17 Orac blog entry because it addressed some of the content of my "Analyzing Louie Gohmert" entries in this blog. Gohmert repeatedly mentioned the numbers debunked in the August 17 piece.

Stay safe.

Bob Dietz

September 5, 2020