@jespah,
Certainly no specifics were required, but since you've obviously reasearched the subject you probably know that both medical and statistical cost-benefit analyses show that by every quantifiable measure you're better off as a heroin addict than as a morbidly obese human. (NB this calculation is based on laboratory-supplied heroin where such distribution is legal - not "street" heroin, which is cut with contaminants). You're probably also familiar with addiction experiments like this recent one, on rats >
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/48605/title/Junk_food_turns_rats_into_addicts
> and you must know there's no such thing as addiction to food, per se, only to salt, sugar, or fat (unless naturally found in lean fish, meat, fruits, vegetables - no additives whatsoever). Medical insurers (that's an internal risk assessment calculation) would rather cover the annual $100,000 of AIDS drugs than take on a morbidly obese person of the same age, and that's before counting "externalities" like costs of reinforced beds, etc.
So, of course there is general resentment and bias on the part of the rest of society, as all your PDF files demonstrate - nothing surprising there. But ultimately I think what you, and Osso, and Thomas are referring to is what the NYT reporter wrote on the link I posted in an early page of this thread about creations from the"...Island of Dr. Moreau.... not quite human". But is that characterization truly so unfair? Obesity doesn't exist in nature, and all other diseases do.