Should we continue to pay benefit to this person

[SFTPhotography]

When my son was on JSA a couple of years ago, he was being told to apply for jobs in Portsmouth when we live on the Isle of Wight. The boat travel would cost more than he would have got paid but the Job Centre staff didn't care about that. They see a job as a way to get the unemployment figures lower, not as a means to earn money!


Steve.

Couldn't he have moved to Portsmouth?

 

[Steve Smith]

Couldn't he have moved to Portsmouth?

For a crappy job which was only going to last six months until he started college? Most definitely not.
Plus he would have to live somewhere so that would cost the government more in housing benefit. He currently lives with us so there isn't any government expense there.

And it would be much better if an unemployed person from Portsmouth took the Portsmouth job.

Steve.

 

[SFTPhotography]

For a crappy job which was only going to last six months until he started college? Most definitely not.
Plus he would have to live somewhere so that would cost the government more in housing benefit. He currently lives with us so there isn't any government expense there.


Steve.

Why did he need benefit if he was living with you?

 

[Steve Smith]

Why did he need benefit if he was living with you?

Food, clothing, paying us something to stay here. Plus it's on offer. Only an idiot would turn it down.

At eighteen, most normal thinking people would rather have a bit of cash than the self righteous feeling of moral superiority they might get from turning it down. I know I did when I was unemployed for three months back in 1985 and living with my parents.


Steve.

 

[nilagin]

Yes, more or less regardless of how much you eat or how it's cooked - in lard, tallow, butter or ghee would be best, as it would further increase the satiety.

I should say that is within reason. The reason weight loss would happen is that fat is metabolised totally differently in the body, and has a different metabolic effect. It is also much more satiating, being both higher calorie (than protein or sugar) as well as suppressing insulin and thereby allowing your body to access stored fat as an energy source. Therefore it's actually extremely difficult to eat huge amounts of only fat and protein. If someone was to force themselves to eat huge amounts, they would increase weight, but I believe they would be forcing themselves. (Look at the video link I posted above - the guy ate DOUBLE quantities of fat/protein for three weeks and gained only 1.3kg, whereas he should (by calorie formula) have gained 7kg. Meanwhile despite the weight gain his waist measurement decreased (i.e. the excess calories were not stored as the usual abdominal fat).

It's counter-intuitive, but only because we've had "calories in / calories out" repeated over and over. Actual experimental evidence proves that not to be the case, and the macronutrient composition strongly drives how food is metabolised and the effect it has.

I looked at the link you posted and the reason it lead to weight loss is because he was consuming unsaturated fats, which lower cholesterol and help reduce fat. Bacon is saturated fat, as are butter and lard so they would increase fat in bodyweight, not reduce it.

 

[Moadib]

I looked at the link you posted and the reason it lead to weight loss is because he was consuming unsaturated fats, which lower cholesterol and help reduce fat. Bacon is saturated fat, as are butter and lard so they would increase fat in bodyweight, not reduce it.

Sorry nilagin, but that is not the case.

In each experiment he includes an excel sheet of all data - for his "recovery" diet he tried to eat enough calories to maintain the weight he gained. That recovery diet was 77.5% fat, which came primarily from eggs, bacon, butter, cream, lamb chops, cheese, avocado etc - all heavy in saturated fat. On that diet he LOST 6 kilograms in weight, and 7.5cm from his waist measurement. Again, with high saturated fat consumption, despite eating 3,500 kcals per day, he lost weight and adominal fat. You can download all the spreadsheets from his site.

Saturated fat does not make you fat - quite the opposite. Saturated fats also improve your cholesterol measurements and reduce your body fat. In fact you need to be more careful with polyunsaturated fats, since one of the problems with today's diet is far too much omega-6. Even if people are eating sufficient omega-3, as 3&6 are metabolised through the same pathways in the body, if you eat too much omega 6 (lots of "healthy" vegetable oils for example) the effect is that you will be insufficient in omega 3 (which is a bad place to be)

 

[Moadib]

Incidentally, all foods in nature contain a mix of all three fats, saturates, monounsaturates and polyunsaturates - it's impossible to eat a food which is only saturated (or only unsaturated). Sirloin steak comprises 71% water, 21% protein, 3.3% unsaturated fat, and 2.1% saturated fat - so it's more unsaturated than saturated. Bacon fat is 50% unsaturated.

( So 71% of the price of a sirloin steak is water )

 

[nilagin]

Saturated fats also improve your cholesterol measurements and reduce your body fat.

No it doesn't, it increases cholesterol. Unsaturated Omega 3 fats reduce cholesterol.

 

[kendo1]

No it doesn't, it increases cholesterol. Unsaturated Omega 3 fats reduce cholesterol.

Yep.
Link:http://www.heartfoundation.org.au/healthy-eating/fats/Pages/default.aspx

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Sorry nilagin, but that is not the case.

In each experiment he includes an excel sheet of all data - for his "recovery" diet he tried to eat enough calories to maintain the weight he gained. That recovery diet was 77.5% fat, which came primarily from eggs, bacon, butter, cream, lamb chops, cheese, avocado etc - all heavy in saturated fat. On that diet he LOST 6 kilograms in weight, and 7.5cm from his waist measurement. Again, with high saturated fat consumption, despite eating 3,500 kcals per day, he lost weight and adominal fat. You can download all the spreadsheets from his site.

Saturated fat does not make you fat - quite the opposite. Saturated fats also improve your cholesterol measurements and reduce your body fat. In fact you need to be more careful with polyunsaturated fats, since one of the problems with today's diet is far too much omega-6. Even if people are eating sufficient omega-3, as 3&6 are metabolised through the same pathways in the body, if you eat too much omega 6 (lots of "healthy" vegetable oils for example) the effect is that you will be insufficient in omega 3 (which is a bad place to be)

Let's all eat lard then, innit? We'll be slim as anorexic super models

 

[Peter69]

Sorry nilagin, but that is not the case.

In each experiment he includes an excel sheet of all data - for his "recovery" diet he tried to eat enough calories to maintain the weight he gained. That recovery diet was 77.5% fat, which came primarily from eggs, bacon, butter, cream, lamb chops, cheese, avocado etc - all heavy in saturated fat. On that diet he LOST 6 kilograms in weight, and 7.5cm from his waist measurement. Again, with high saturated fat consumption, despite eating 3,500 kcals per day, he lost weight and adominal fat. You can download all the spreadsheets from his site.

Saturated fat does not make you fat - quite the opposite. Saturated fats also improve your cholesterol measurements and reduce your body fat. In fact you need to be more careful with polyunsaturated fats, since one of the problems with today's diet is far too much omega-6. Even if people are eating sufficient omega-3, as 3&6 are metabolised through the same pathways in the body, if you eat too much omega 6 (lots of "healthy" vegetable oils for example) the effect is that you will be insufficient in omega 3 (which is a bad place to be)

Due to my recovery I need a healthy diet. My cholesterol is checked very regularly. I tried to reduce fat as much as I could and my cholesterol went up!! A healthy diet needs fat. I now use an app called myfitnesspal to monitor my intake. Its quite scary where the craps hidden.

 

[big soft moose]

Facts are inconvenient for you?

It's a long term investment, it was deemed the company could recover from where it was and grow. As it slowly is.

regardless my point still stands

if it was a bail out - how come the government doesnt get a say in bankers bonuses - as they are paying for them to keep their jobs

if it was an investment how come they don't get a say as the majority shareholder ?

 

[dejongj]

Don't forget that there are legalities involved such as employment contracts which will describe the remuneration package. There could be consequences to breaking those terms.

 

[Moadib]

No it doesn't, it increases cholesterol. Unsaturated Omega 3 fats reduce cholesterol.

I know, my comment was very specific saying it improved cholesterol (not increase or decrease).

 

[Moadib]

Due to my recovery I need a healthy diet. My cholesterol is checked very regularly. I tried to reduce fat as much as I could and my cholesterol went up!! A healthy diet needs fat. I now use an app called myfitnesspal to monitor my intake. Its quite scary where the craps hidden.

Precisely. And we also need to be careful, since what is being measured is not "cholesterol", but lipoproteins (there is only one type of "cholesterol" in the universe, no such thing as "good" or "bad". What is being measured in so-called cholesterol tests are actually lipoproteins (HDL and LDL).

Cutting fat from your diet means you need to eat something else - it is that "something else" (usually ultimately glucose) that shifts the lipoprotein ("cholesterol") profile - your LDL increases (far more particles, and much smaller in size), and reduces your HDL. Two of these things are bad - increased number of liver-created small LDL, and the reduction in HDL.

Eating more fat does the opposite - it will increase your HDL, and will increase the SIZE of your LDL particles - both considered to be good for you.

(Thought experiment - cholesterol is SO vital to the human body that almost every cell in your body has the ability to make it's own. If we don't eat enough the cells WILL produce and pump out their own cholesterol. Do we think our own bodies are trying to kill us? In fact cholesterol is so vital to us that we're designed not to take the risk that the diet will not supply enough, and we can manufacture our own)

 

[new2me]

I know, my comment was very specific saying it improved cholesterol (not increase or decrease).

there is only one type of "cholesterol" in the universe, no such thing as "good" or "bad"

If there's no good or bad cholestorol, how is it "improved?"

 

[Moadib]

If there's no good or bad cholestorol, how is it "improved?"

The confusion comes because people talk about "cholesterol" when actually the subject is lipoproteins (HDL and LDL both being lipoproteins, basically carriers for cholesterol and triglycerides). What gets changed by diet is in fact the lipoprotein profile (but in the normal parlance we would say "cholesterol improved", because although strictly speaking that is not correct it is what people will understand).

Lipid profile shifts when eating low fat: HDL down. LDL particle count up. LDL particle size down. Triglycerides up.
Lipid profile shifts when eating high fat: HDL up. LDL particle count down. LDL particle size up. Triglycerides down.

All of the "low fat" outcomes are associated with bad health outcomes. All of the high fat are associated with good health outcomes. The mechanisms and the why are still being debated - the biggest mistake I think we can make is considering that these things are well established and the science is settled - dig into it for any length of time and we find that even among experts there is huge debate on what actually is happening in this area.

 

[dejongj]

Eat less, eat fresh, and exercise more. Very simple really.

 

[nilagin]

Eat less, eat fresh, and exercise more. Very simple really.

That should actually be eat less, more often. Your body has a much better chance of utilising the nutrition from the food then. 5 small meals a day should do it.

 

[dejongj]

That should actually be eat less, more often. Your body has a much better chance of utilising the nutrition from the food then. 5 small meals a day should do it.

Possible, I double that a person like in the op could resist grazing on smaller healthier options. Perhaps once she is well into changing her routines that it is something she could bring in. No to start with I would suggest.

 

[h14nha]

If someone wants to eat themselves to death, the state shouldn't sponsor them to do it.............. As a mobile engineer, I have worked in many different areas such as local councils, banks and building societies, prisons etc. The people on the take at the top, are just as bad as the people on the take at the bottom................. The system as it is, is wide open to fraudulent claims. My parents, who live in an ex-authority house, have neighbours who haven't worked for as long as I can remember, have neighbours who knock out children but never take their eyes off daytime TV to see what they are getting up to, have neighbours who are too ill to work but never miss a night down the pub, have neighbours driving nearly new Audi's who don't work ( and haven't for the 10 years or so they have lived there ). There's more but you get where I'm going.
Thats just a small section of the society that i regularly see. My colleague has neighbours complaining they only had 2 holidays last year instead of the usual 3 ( he by the way, had no holidays as he couldn't afford it ). When I had nearly a year off work due to a work accident, I wasn't entitled to a penny, I scraped by having about a 1/7 of my pre accident wage ( which didn't even cover my chiropractor sessions ). I came back to work in debt ( luckily, I only had living bills to pay ) which took 3 years to get clear on.
Every day I took a walk to keep mobile, where I stopped for a coffee ( it was freezing winter time ) there were a group of guys ( one who I knew from previous employment, who faked a work injury and hadn't worked since, he bragged this to me one day ) who would talk about where they had been on holiday and where they were going next.
Is it any wonder myself, and people with like minded views feel so harshly about the system. I'm not that naive to think I'm unique in seeing this, its happening all over the country. People have a sense of entitlement to taxpayers money to which they haven't contributed..........

 

[kennethwfd]

the reasoning behind frequent small meals is that it avoids hunger pangs and subsequent bingeing which is why starvation diets hardly ever work

however the person in the op is not going to do anything about it so should not be paid. The state of the economy is hardly rosy, and I can think of many better ways of spending the £35,000 she is receiving every year wonder how many hospital beds for a start, or that my local authority cannot afford to fund local buses

 

[archangel]

If someone wants to eat themselves to death, the state shouldn't sponsor them to do it.............. As a mobile engineer, I have worked in many different areas such as local councils, banks and building societies, prisons etc. The people on the take at the top, are just as bad as the people on the take at the bottom................. The system as it is, is wide open to fraudulent claims. My parents, who live in an ex-authority house, have neighbours who haven't worked for as long as I can remember, have neighbours who knock out children but never take their eyes off daytime TV to see what they are getting up to, have neighbours who are too ill to work but never miss a night down the pub, have neighbours driving nearly new Audi's who don't work ( and haven't for the 10 years or so they have lived there ). There's more but you get where I'm going.
Thats just a small section of the society that i regularly see. My colleague has neighbours complaining they only had 2 holidays last year instead of the usual 3 ( he by the way, had no holidays as he couldn't afford it ). When I had nearly a year off work due to a work accident, I wasn't entitled to a penny, I scraped by having about a 1/7 of my pre accident wage ( which didn't even cover my chiropractor sessions ). I came back to work in debt ( luckily, I only had living bills to pay ) which took 3 years to get clear on.
Every day I took a walk to keep mobile, where I stopped for a coffee ( it was freezing winter time ) there were a group of guys ( one who I knew from previous employment, who faked a work injury and hadn't worked since, he bragged this to me one day ) who would talk about where they had been on holiday and where they were going next.
Is it any wonder myself, and people with like minded views feel so harshly about the system. I'm not that naive to think I'm unique in seeing this, its happening all over the country. People have a sense of entitlement to taxpayers money to which they haven't contributed..........

I hear what you are saying....I was off work for over two years due to illness....did I get a penny from the government....NOPE...... I had to give up my businesses and struggle through on what wages my wife had.....it really makes me sick watching scroungers and low life scum bleeding the system with excuses to take but not put in.....

The benefits system is a feckin joke....just saying

 

[kennethwfd]

I hear what you are saying....I was off work for over two years due to illness....did I get a penny from the government....NOPE...... I had to give up my businesses and struggle through on what wages my wife had.....it really makes me sick watching scroungers and low life scum bleeding the system with excuses to take but not put in.....

The benefits system is a feckin joke....just saying

I totally sympathise. I'm reminded of a recent hit and run by, and I quote "the unemployed mother of two in her £30k Range Rover with personalised number plate..." The article did not confirm she is/was in recept of state aid, but assuming so in my opinion those who claim should have their assets assessed. Then include the monetry value as savings. allowance for a car, say £5,000 Personalised plate a luxury so 100% of its value

I can barely afford to keep an old Astra costing around £300 together.and plan to start a new business...will I get any help? (oink oink overhead)? It will be financed from a private pension from previous employment

 

[ChasG]

A simple thing that has helped me lose two and a half stone is to eat slowly.
Put cutlery down between bites, put sandwich down between bites.
Don't eat crap, as in ready meals etc but otherwise eat what you want.
A curry now and again is no problem - my snacks are real cheese and good chocolate.
No sugar or any of these low fat poisons - eat butter.
Works for me.

BTW I do very little exercise due to congenital health problem which make even walking a problem.

 

[Steve Smith]

A simple thing that has helped me lose two and a half stone is to eat slowly.
Put cutlery down between bites, put sandwich down between bites.

This was part of Paul McKenna's self hypnosis diet plan.

The three main points were:

1. Eat what you like.
2. Only eat when you are hungry.
3. Stop when you are full (most important).

The idea of putting the fork/sandwich/etc. down between bites was to make sure you achieve No. 3. i.e. you don't stuff another mouthfull in before you realise you're not hungry.

the reasoning behind frequent small meals is that it avoids hunger pangs and subsequent bingeing which is why starvation diets hardly ever work

When you eat, your insulin level rises. When it gets above a threshold, it triggers your body to convert glucose to stored fat.

If you eat three meals a day, it is likely that you will exceed that threshold three times. However, if you eat the same amount of food but spread it over five meal times, your insulin level will rise five times during the day, but no to such a high level. Hopefully not exceeding the threshold so no glucose is turned to fat.


Steve.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

One thing that helped me lose weight last year was following recipes and weighing portions. The first time I did this it came as a great shock what a 'normal' portion size was and I was left feeling unsatisfied after a meal (but not hungry)! After a few days of this, my stomach shrank quite quickly and I was feeling full and satisfied after these smaller portions.

Then I got married, went on honeymoon to France and Italy, and didn't touch the scales until xmas. My brother in law pulled out his scales at xmas and I jumped on, after converting from kg to stones I thought my conversion was wrong. Jumped on the scales at home and found I have put 23b on in 6 months *but strangely only one notch on the belt??)

So back to square one again (actually square on + 9 lbs...)

 

[ChasG]

Talking of weighing yourself. I weigh my self every 3/4 days BUT have to weigh myself more than once per occasion as the scales seem to remember the previous figure so second time is to get weight and third to confirm. These are electronic ones with the glass plate.

Edit sp errors

 

[Swanseajack]

Some of the assumptions written in this thread are just that, assumptions, from my experiences. I had to give up work about five years ago due to Arthritis and Fibromyalgia plus other medical problems, I had worked for 28 years or so and paid a far bit into the system as I had a good job(s).

I have had numerous medicals with ATOS who are/were the subcontractors for carrying out DWP health assessments on benefit claimants. My first experience was very bad when the doctor lied on the forms from the medical assessment. You have to fail or pass which ever way you look at it, in these medicals and achieve 15 points in one section of the medical on there scoring system to stay on ESA. Otherwise you will go on JSA.

I never reached 15 points until I went to appeal which I won and I was placed in the ESA Support Group. When looking at the bundles before going to appeal the DWP disability officers reviewing my case had given me 15 points and declared I was unfit for work, some clerk I assume had said I was fit for work??? My dIfferent Specialists and my GP reports supplied myself were also ingnored.

So from my experience it's not that easy to get ESA and other sickness benefits as widely assumed in this thread.

From what has been written above you cannot get a car with a value over £25k so the Range Rovers will be ruled out. I was self employed before giving up work and provided you have paid stamp you are entitled to SSP or ESA if your unwell/sick or injured. If you have had a serious injury you would also be able to apply for Industrial Injuries Benefit which is for life. So you could get some help from the system provided you paid your stamp.

I will be honest and say things are very tight with us and we haven't been on holiday for 7 years and we get no help as my wife works full time. Another problem, the system is not means tested but hours tested, as in the case of my wife, who works more than 24hrs a week.

So in summary, in my area and from my experiences it has been a nightmare to get some benefits for genuine people like myself. The system has tightened up and you won't get sickness benefits if you can't prove your un-fit for work after the initial assessment period. My suspicion is some of these people are claiming JSA and therefore are fit for work.

A lot of people believe what is written in some of these red tops, myself, I wouldn't believe the date is right in some of them.

 

[Moadib]

When you eat, your insulin level rises. When it gets above a threshold, it triggers your body to convert glucose to stored fat.

If you eat three meals a day, it is likely that you will exceed that threshold three times. However, if you eat the same amount of food but spread it over five meal times, your insulin level will rise five times during the day, but no to such a high level. Hopefully not exceeding the threshold so no glucose is turned to fat.

Steve.

Minor adjustment to that is that when you eat carbohydrate/sugar your insulin level rises. To a lesser extent with protein. When eating fat there is no insulin reaction.

But generally agree, the more meals you eat per day (in particular sugar based) the more insulin raising events there are - as long as insulin is high your body is running in "storage mode" (clearing glucose away into fat cells), and there is no chance that stored fat can be accessed and burned as energy. The body still NEEDS energy - accessing stored fat is out, therefore it triggers hunger to get more that way. It's a vicious cycle - the more small meals you eat, the hungrier your body will make you.

The reason behind this is that our bodies contain about 1,000 teaspoons of blood - at any given time there needs to be 1 teaspoon of glucose in the blood (so 0.1% concentration). A diabetic level of blood sugar is 1.25 teaspoons - one quarter of a teaspoon is a metabolic problem for the body. Think how many teaspoons of sugar are in the average meal (remembering that potato, bread, pasta, rice etc all break rapidly down into glucose). It's huge. That's a four alarm fire for our bodies, and the primary thing which must be done is to manage all that glucose. So the liver starts converting all that blood sugar (ironically!) into a saturated fat, to be stored. The created fat is packaged up into VLDL molecules and sent round the body to be stored in your fat cells to be burned later (and those VLDL molecules are what will give a bad "cholesterol" reading). But with insulin levels still high stored fat cannot be accessed - so the body sends hunger pangs....and down comes another sugary meal. Cue the same firefighting by the liver, and more sugar converted to saturated fat, and stored.

 

[boyfalldown]

If someone wants to eat themselves to death, the state shouldn't sponsor them to do it.............. As a mobile engineer, I have worked in many different areas such as local councils, banks and building societies, prisons etc. The people on the take at the top, are just as bad as the people on the take at the bottom................. The system as it is, is wide open to fraudulent claims. My parents, who live in an ex-authority house, have neighbours who haven't worked for as long as I can remember, have neighbours who knock out children but never take their eyes off daytime TV to see what they are getting up to, have neighbours who are too ill to work but never miss a night down the pub, have neighbours driving nearly new Audi's who don't work ( and haven't for the 10 years or so they have lived there ). There's more but you get where I'm going.
Thats just a small section of the society that i regularly see. My colleague has neighbours complaining they only had 2 holidays last year instead of the usual 3 ( he by the way, had no holidays as he couldn't afford it ). When I had nearly a year off work due to a work accident, I wasn't entitled to a penny, I scraped by having about a 1/7 of my pre accident wage ( which didn't even cover my chiropractor sessions ). I came back to work in debt ( luckily, I only had living bills to pay ) which took 3 years to get clear on.
Every day I took a walk to keep mobile, where I stopped for a coffee ( it was freezing winter time ) there were a group of guys ( one who I knew from previous employment, who faked a work injury and hadn't worked since, he bragged this to me one day ) who would talk about where they had been on holiday and where they were going next.
Is it any wonder myself, and people with like minded views feel so harshly about the system. I'm not that naive to think I'm unique in seeing this, its happening all over the country. People have a sense of entitlement to taxpayers money to which they haven't contributed..........

I'm always amazed to read posts like this. You do know the benefit fraud rate in the uk is around 1%. Not really the issue you'd like to make out

 

[Steve Smith]

I'm always amazed to read posts like this. You do know the benefit fraud rate in the uk is around 1%. Not really the issue you'd like to make out

I read that it was about a tenth of that figure. Reducing it to zero would have just about no effect on anything. The time and effort would be much better spent chasing big businesses for unpaid tax.

Unfortunately, making out that everyone on benefits is a work shy scrounger is easy for 'publications' such as The Daily Mail to get the general public worked up and angry.


Steve.

 

[Steve Smith]

Minor adjustment to that is that when you eat carbohydrate/sugar your insulin level rises. To a lesser extent with protein. When eating fat there is no insulin reaction.

Thanks. I'm no expert (obviously!). It was just something I read in Ian Marber's The Food Doctor Everyday Diet book which made a lot of sense.


Steve.

 

[boyfalldown]

I read that it was about a tenth of that figure. Reducing it to zero would have just about no effect on anything. The time and effort would be much better spent chasing big businesses for unpaid tax.

Unfortunately, making out that everyone on benefits is a work shy scrounger is easy for 'publications' such as The Daily Mail to get the general public worked up and angry.


Steve.

I know that if you could stop genuine errors, on both sides, then it would make roughly double the difference as stopping fraud. Still a negligible amount though

 

[Moadib]

Thanks. I'm no expert (obviously!). It was just something I read in Ian Marber's The Food Doctor Everyday Diet book which made a lot of sense.

Steve.

Agree, it does make sense. I ended up reading quite a lot on this area, and while reading one thing that really came across is that even the genuine experts don't know - they know WHAT happens of course, but why it happens is subject to a lot of speculation and research.

Protein giving an insulin response makes sense, as insulin is anabolic (building) and when you eat protein generally the body wants to use it for building and repair (however it can also be broken down to glucose for fuel, although the process is not so efficient). The sugar one is more interesting - experts are speculating, but pre-farming our ancestors would have had access to large amounts of sugar only at short specific times, such as when trees were fruiting, and/or when honey was available. Both of those would be in or around autumn time. Therefore it would make a lot of sense (or convey an evolutionary advantage) that whenever sugars were eaten they triggered fat storage, as a means of cladding against the coming cold, and to access as energy when the person may have to go some time between meals. Research has also shown that eating a lot of fructose (fruit sugar) triggers hibernation hormones in animals like bears - so it's a theory that might fit.

 

[Swanseajack]

I read that it was about a tenth of that figure. Reducing it to zero would have just about no effect on anything. The time and effort would be much better spent chasing big businesses for unpaid tax.

Unfortunately, making out that everyone on benefits is a work shy scrounger is easy for 'publications' such as The Daily Mail to get the general public worked up and angry.


Steve.

I know that if you could stop genuine errors, on both sides, then it would make roughly double the difference as stopping fraud. Still a negligible amount though

Looking at my case. I had all the medical facts about my illnesses from my Specialists and GP and for me I am never going to get better, only worse. Why the system made me go to the appeal route when even there disability assessors stated that I was unfit for work is beyond me. I think they were hoping I would back down and not claim, theres probably a lot of people who cant be bothered with the hassle I went through and give up. Thats not fair on genuine people. I had too as I would probably have lost my house if I didn't. It was a very stressful situation.

How much has this cost the system, the reviews by the DWP medical people, appeal which was held by a Solicitor, GP, Clerk, building cost etc....??

You only have to look around some of the disability websites to see the mess the way some of these cases are handled.

 

[Steve Smith]

You only have to look around some of the disability websites to see the mess the way some of these cases are handled.

My wife had an Atos assessment a few years ago. THeir 'medical professional' had no medical training at all. In fact, she told my wife that before she had the job she was a driving instructor!


Steve.

 

[nilagin]

But generally agree, the more meals you eat per day (in particular sugar based) the more insulin raising events there are - as long as insulin is high your body is running in "storage mode" (clearing glucose away into fat cells), and there is no chance that stored fat can be accessed and burned as energy. The body still NEEDS energy - accessing stored fat is out, therefore it triggers hunger to get more that way. It's a vicious cycle - the more small meals you eat, the hungrier your body will make you.

As someone who weight trains I eat 5 small meals a day and the 5 meals a day are enough, the only time I feel hungry is if I'm late for my next planned meal. I'm not hungry again after the last.

 

[Swanseajack]

My wife had an Atos assessment a few years ago. THeir 'medical professional' had no medical training at all. In fact, she told my wife that before she had the job she was a driving instructor!


Steve.

Crazy in it. I have only seen doctors due to my types of illness. I knew they used nurses and physio's but driving instructors! You dont see the Red Tops reporting these.

 

[boyfalldown]

My wife had an Atos assessment a few years ago. THeir 'medical professional' had no medical training at all. In fact, she told my wife that before she had the job she was a driving instructor!


Steve.

just unbelievable