Attack on Obesity Enables UN Schemes Progressing Population Reduction

A new study released in the Journal of Rural Health states that 1/5th of people who live in rural areas are more likely to become obese than those living in urban centers.

Christie Befort, lead author of the study and assistant professor in the Department of Preventive Medicine at the University of Kansas Medical Center, said: “The rates of obesity were much higher than previously reported based on self-report, with 39 percent of rural Americans being obese compared to 33 percent of urban Americans.”

Young people have been targeted as having a propensity toward becoming obese in rural areas. It was also noted that ethnicity played a part in the likelihood of becoming overweight. Blacks and Hispanics, according to the study, have a poor diet and are physically isolated, and do not necessarily have access to healthy food.

The ideal behind this study is that if these people resided in urban centers, they would be healthier, have access to exercise equipment and make better choices in food consumption. However, this theology stems from the concept that people need to move into cities under Agenda 21 to be better controlled.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg states that obesity costs New Yorkers $4 billion in healthcare costs annually and that this is unacceptable. Bloomberg is championing the movement toward government-controlled oversight into what citizens eat, which foods they have access to and how much of a burden their personal choices can become on their immediate society.

At a UN General Assembly meeting in 1994 concerning the implementation of Agenda 21 with regard to population growth and subsequent control, the consensus was that there must be a continued trend toward stabilization of the world’s population through mandates of international and national policies that control the allowance of citizens to contribute to the growth of the human population.

Last July, the London Summit on Family Planning, hosted by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation asserted that population reduction must be facilitated through forced sterilization, coercion to using contraceptives through use of the Delphi technique, and collaboration with Merck to develop vaccines and other pharmaceutical solutions to keeping those living in under-developed nations from having children.

The anti-obesity movement, according to Bebecca Puhl, Yale researcher, is not having the desired effect of deterring people from eating – as those who are behind these attacks hope to achieve. Puhl found that public announcements against over-eating have had the opposite effect on Americans.

Puhl said in a press release: “By stigmatizing obesity or individuals struggling with their weight, campaigns can alienate the audience they intend to motivate and hinder the behaviors they intend to encourage.”

Understanding the stigma surrounding obesity, wherein these campaigns alienate their target audience, must be readdressed by public health officials, says Puhl. She suggests that rather than shame these people encourage them to become healthier.

More attacks on food consumption have been directed at American teenagers who are now classified as having a metabolic syndrome that links children’s brain function and cognitive capacity to their waistlines. In essence, fat kids are stupid.

Dr. Antonio Convit, lead author, correlated his findings with other psychiatrists, as well as worked in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to concoct a proactive diagnosis that could label children with metabolic syndrome under five “warning signs”:

• Abdominal obesity
• Low cholesterol
• High triglycerides
• High blood pressure
• Pre-diabetic levels of insulin resistance

While children are learning about nutrition from government mandated programs, the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) has released a study showing that “the prevalence of obesity among urban children has touched 10 to 20 per cent which is very high. Also, we have noticed that it is greater in children from private schools than in the government schools, making it clear that kids from the middle or higher socio-economic families are more prone to obesity than those from lower middle or lower socio economic groups,” according to B. Sesikeran, director of NIN.

WHO asserts that the lack of “surveillance systems and monitoring” of over-weight people are not “integrated into national health information systems”. They demand that obese people are surveyed by the healthcare industry and governmental agencies to reduce “behavioral and metabolic risk factors” in low-income communities.

The target of these researchers is North America, specifically the American population. Although Americans only account for 6% of the global population, more than a third of them are considered obese. They contend a new social meme concerning consumption, weight and population growth called “globesity” must be introduced to combat this new problem.

Ian Roberts, professor and co-author of the study explains: “When people think about environmental sustainability, they immediately focus on population. Actually, when it comes down to it – it’s not how many mouths there are to feed, it is how much flesh there is on the planet.”

The UN blames “rapid unplanned urbanization” and the “globalization of unhealthy lifestyles” as the culprits of the obesity epidemic. The UN also declares that the cost of overweight and obese individuals in a drain on our global economy; and a burden indicative of large, affluent societies, like America.

A new propaganda study published in the Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, claims that vaccines are the answer to the chemical and psychological issues that surround obesity. The co-author of the study was also the president and chief scientific officer of a company called Braasch Biotech LLC. Braasch Biotech LLC, which specializes in the development of human and animal vaccines. Essentially, by inhibiting natural hormones, researchers hope to stop people from eating.