I was asked to be the guest on Rebecca Kimbel’s interview show. The sound is a bit weak (and she forgot to put the “Q” in my name in quotation marks) but it was a fun interview. I thought I’d share. It’s 28 minutes long but I hope you enjoy.
Getting Past What Holds You Back with Baby Boomer Weight Loss Expert Scott 'Q' Marcus
I was asked to be the guest on Rebecca Kimbel’s interview show. The sound is a bit weak (and she forgot to put the “Q” in my name in quotation marks) but it was a fun interview. I thought I’d share. It’s 28 minutes long but I hope you enjoy.
For example, a Catholic Priest would have a tough road to hoe to get hired as a Rabbi, no matter how extensive his career background. There’s really no reason NOT to hire him, but it’s just not going to happen, is it? We accept that.
Under federal law, employers generally cannot discriminate on the basis of several factors, including (but not limited to) race, sex, religion, disability, or age (for workers over 40). Yet only Michigan and six U.S. cities ban discrimination against hiring overweight people.
I understand — to a point. After all, a severely obese person might also be very unhealthy. She might not be able to perform her duties, especially involving physical activity. However, is it tolerable to discriminate against her because she doesn’t “look the part?”
Citizens Medical Center in Texas now requires potential employees to have a body mass index of less than 35 (about 210 pounds for someone who is 5’ 5”). Their controversial policy states an employee’s physique
“Should fit with a representational image or specific mental projection of the job of a healthcare professional,” including an appearance “free from distraction” for hospital patients.
For example, certain companies will not hire employees who smoke. That, however, is because of the side effects of their behavior, such as higher health care costs or insurance premiums. It is NOT because they do not approve of the smoker’s appearance.
What’s different here is that the policy doesn’t indicate costs or side effects; nor does it suggest that obese employees are incapable of performing their tasks. Mostly, it refers to physical form, placing overweight applicants in the same category as those with visible tattoos or facial piercings (which is a whole other discussion).
The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance claims, “discrimination plain and simple.”
Believe it or not, this is just one of many questions science cannot surely resolve. There are others: What is gravity? Why do we dream? How many species inhabit our planet? Why is it that the freeway lane I choose is always the slowest? (Okay, in all fairness, I really doubt if scientists spend much time on the last question.)
Since my field is health, I’ve often wondered why is it that we determine someone’s correct weight based on the Quetelet Index of Obesity, a formula dating back to nineteenth-century Europe? Granted, about a century later we shifted to Body Mass Index (BMI), which is weight divided by height squared. Yet the main premise remained in tact: how tall you are is virtually the sole factor to determine how much you should weigh.
That has never made sense to me. Why would a 5’ 6” forty-four year old vegan woman who enjoys yoga and jogs with regularity; and a sedentary man of equal stature who scarfs red meat, French fries, and drives his car 100 yards to the corner store; be considered healthy at the same weight? I have always thought something’s messed up.
Climbing over the horizon in the east as night gives birth to morning, the scenic tapestry of golds, reds, blues, and yellows can be nothing less than the orchestration of colors conducted by a Divine Being. When the non-embarrassed, joyfully infused, uninhibited laughter of a baby bursts forth and fills your ears and heart, have you any choice but to believe that is the voice of God? Surviving a catastrophic accident unscathed or recovering from the abyss of a life-threatening illness will bolster the faith of almost any non-believer.
Should those illustrations not be enough to persuade you of the loving omnipotence of an all-powerful benevolent Spirit, I present to you definitive proof:
According to a recent study, people who ate chocolate a few times per week (or more) weighed less than those who rarely indulged in the sweet.
Let’s make sure you read that correctly. Chocolate lovers weighed LESS than those who consumed the sweet brown Gift From Heavens less often. I understand that this column you are reading is first appearing in proximate to April Fool’s day, yet rest assured I am not punking you. [Read more…]
It’s 5:49 in length and talks about a recent study about how people who eat chocolate more often tend to be less obese and more healthy than people who eat it less often. You can find the study here.
You can download it by clicking here.
You can read the column here.