Bahama Mamas and Papas

So I have some exciting news: I am going to the Bahamas for spring break!!! Yipee! I am talking sipping drinks on the beach, feeling the sun on my skin, and partaking in some delicious Caribbean dishes. Now of course, I have to get my beach body together, because I want to look awesome while lying on the beach! In order to reach my bikini body goal, I have been upping my already intense workout routine, and watching what I eat (this part not so much).

Luckily, I have the options of working and eating better. I can go buy workout DVDs (Jillian Michaels is a BEAST!), go use the state-of-the-art facilities here at Yale, and I have the means to go the grocery and buy healthy foods, like fresh fruits and veggies. Because I have the ability to do these things, I will be rewarded with my beach body, and a feeling of accomplishment. However, some people, for whatever, do not have the ability to control their weight at easily as I am. Do they deserve to feel like failures?

This is an opinion brought up recently in an article in the New England Journal of Medicine. Wellness Programs and incentives for healthy lifestyles have, as of late, been a burgeoning concept in healthcare. By giving people incentives to lose weight, exercise more, stop smoking, and drop other unhealthy habits, it is the hope of employers and the government, that chronic illnesses associated with unhealthy lifestyles will be decreased, and health care costs will decrease. This is all well and fine, but wellness programs con sometimes forget that not everybody has the tools needed to kick their bad habits, and often, they are punished for it, not assisted to help them reach healthier goals. Additionally, what about those who really try to get that proverbial beach body, and lose weight, but genetics stand in their way? Should they feel like failures because they could not reach a certain goal?

I think that wellness programs are awesome. For me, the incentive of looking good on the beach is enough for me to want to get in better shape. But I also can do so, relatively easy. Sometimes, incentives to be healthy are not enough. Empowering people with assistance, and attempting to eliminate barriers to healthier behaviors are needed to supplement incentives to live healthier lives.

--Whitney

Could this be the end? It's only my first post :-/

Tomorrow's special election for the late senator Ted Kennedy's seat in the US Senate could bring any hope for health care reform to a screeching halt. The race has gotten all too close for the Democratic candidate, Martha Coaxley, who was at one point thought to be a shoe-in for the seat, which has been held by a Democrat for decades. If elected, Coaxley would maintain the current 60 vote majority held by the Democratic party, which is crucial for the passage of health care reform.

However, as health care reform (as promoted by Dems) is staunchly opposed by Republicans, election of the GOP candidate for the seat, Scott Brown, would be catastrophic, as he would certainly not vote in favor of current reform efforts, thus paving the way for the GOP to filibuster the bill, which they have made very clear they are prepared to do.

Now I must admit that I really do not care about who wins the senate race tomorrow. While I do consider myself a committed member of the Democratic party, I will be able to sleep just fine tomorrow night if Scott Brown were to win. Trust me. (Actually, I might have nightmares about not being able to blog about health care reform anymore, but I will get over it...in time:-) What I find far more telling about tomorrow's election is what it will imply about current health care reform.

First of all, Mass citizens know more about the implications of current health care reform than most, being that the legislation being proposed is partly based on the Massachusetts health care overhaul of 2006. By voting for a Republican, the people of Massachusetts are essentially voting against health care reform, presumably because they do not like the impact of the health care reform efforts in their state, and do not want the same reform to be implemented across the US.

Secondly, what does this say about the strength and validity of the Democrats current health reform plans that one election holds its fate in the balance? Election of Scott Brown would force Democrats to enter into more bipartisan talks with the GOP if any health care reform is to be passed.

Now, being that I think the proposed health care reform legislation is terrible and watered-down, and will do very littl eto actually cut the incredibly ridiculous costs of health care in this country, I would like to see this bill stopped in its tracks by the election of Scott Brown. However, there is no way that Dems and Republicans will be able to come up with a health reform bill that is any better, therefore, Scott Brown's election would lead likely to no reform at all. So, unfortunately, I believe that tomorrow, the people of Massachusetts will be voting for the lesser of two evils. I can imagine them now, in their voting booth, thinking to themselves, Do I vote for Coaxley so that SOMETHING gets done about health care in this country, albeit, trivial, or do I vote for Brown and watch health care reform go up in smoke, possibly never to return again?"