Something's been stuck in my craw ever since viewing the "story" of a woman's struggle back from a journey to becoming clinically obese,subsequently losing 400 pounds,with the assistance of some kind of lapband or stomach stapling or whatever expensive procedure a doctor would recommend these days. Of course the point being, the lengths to which this poor woman had to go..
If the patient is truly obese, the doctor can prescribe or recommend expensive procedures that are covered by medical insurance if the patient is not well heeled enough to pay out of pocket, then perhaps that obese person could sue the fast food corporation and make them pay.So if you're obese, uninsured and poor, the story is not speaking to you.
The story is for women who like causes(former bra burners turned babyboomers)who "care" about victims.Hmmm, they no doubt, exercise their right to vote and serve jury duty too.Wonder which side they would come down on?Victim or huge corporation with deep pockets?They "empathize" with this poor miserable creature who was so damaged, she took solace from"fast food."In the "storyline" leading up to the dramatic and emotional grand entrance of the "new" 400 pounds lighter version of the once puffy,slitty eyed woman,the video portion showed the heavy woman at a drive through window getting what looked to be,enough food for a family of six! We are told of the pain and anguish she felt as she would pull over to the side of the restaurant and comfort herself by stuffing her face with tacos,burgers,onion rings,fried pies,milkshakes and the list goes on...................................everyday!Her journey to obesity methinks,has been funded by whomever stands to gain(ha ha)the most? Well, that's just me, I know I couldn't afford it.
Of course by the time the audienced watched the promo leading up to the grand introduction of the new version, there wasn't a dry eye in the house, and of course the guest had to daub tears away after seeing the old "fat photos." And so many painful memories of those lonely pig out sessions.No mention of personal restraint,only sympathy.
My problem is this.I can't figure out the hidden agenda here.Okay, let's see. Clearly the scene at the fast food window didn't name any large corporations,it could have been implicating the industry as a whole.Clearly the woman was portrayed as a victim.Then there's the surgery itself. I see ads and promos all over the place promoting it.Now one could conjecture with John Q Public becoming fatter and more disease prone at an alarming rate, we are told;with obesity and diabetes rates rising almost in tandem,we are told;this is a crisis of epic proportion.It certainly then, would explain the popularity(or justify)the need for these procedures.
Of course the bony finger of blame has to be pointed somewhere. So why not some fat-cat corporation with deep pockets who won't miss a few mil for lawyers needed to defend themselves against the "victims." So to me,this is setting the stage for inevitable lawsuits brought by the "victim." The show was to garner sympathy and understanding(from potential jury pool).Sniff,sniff boo hoo, if it wasn't for the smell wafting in the air and luring countless victims, into their evil clutches,...............sniffle.
Who benefits?Certainly not the little guy who doesn't have ,number one, the luxury of time to pull over and binge. The poor schmuck probably only has a half hour for lunch, and has to brown bag it all week, so he can afford to take his family out to a fast food restaurant on the week-end as a special treat! Oh, but lardo the victim can afford to overindulge herself on the way to her fast food induced state of obesity,on a daily basis!Gimme a freakin break!People have real"eating" issues in this country, like not being able to!That's what should genuinely bring tears to our eyes.