Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The big fat con story: fat or slender, Size really doesn't matter

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-04 11:54 PM
Original message
The big fat con story: fat or slender, Size really doesn't matter
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4907685-103425,0...

The big fat con story


Size really doesn't matter. You can be just as healthy if you're fat as you can if you're slender. And don't let the obesity 'experts' persuade you otherwise, argues Paul Campos

Paul Campos
Saturday April 24, 2004
The Guardian

In January 2003, as America prepared to go to war with Iraq, the US surgeon general, Richard Carmona, warned the nation that it faced a far more dangerous threat than Saddam Hussein's supposed weapons of mass destruction. Rather than focusing on the danger posed by nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, Carmona told his audience, "Let's look at a threat that is very real, and already here: obesity."
<snip>

A 1996 project undertaken by scientists at the National Centre for Health Statistics and Cornell University analysed the data from dozens of previous studies, involving a total of more than 600,000 subjects with up to a 30-year follow-up. Among non-smoking white men, the lowest mortality rate was found among those with a BMI between 23 and 29, which means that a large majority of the men who lived longest were "overweight" according to government guidelines. The mortality rate for white men in the supposedly ideal range of 19 to 21 was the same as that for those in the 29 to 31 range (most of whom would be defined now as "obese"). In regard to non-smoking white women, the study's conclusions were even more striking: the BMI range correlating with the lowest mortality rate was extremely broad, from around 18 to 32, meaning a woman of average height could weigh anywhere within an 80-pound range without seeing any statistically significant change in her risk of premature death.
<snip>

Over the past three decades, according to Gaesser's survey of the literature, between 35 and 40 medical studies have found increasing body mass to be associated with a lower incidence of various cancers. Other diseases and syndromes that various medical studies indicate are less common among heavier people include emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hip fracture, vertebral fracture, tuberculosis, anaemia, peptic ulcer and chronic bronchitis, among others. Indeed, how many people are aware that heavier women have much lower rates of osteoporosis, which is a very common and serious condition among older women? Consider the potential implications for public health of the fact that hip fractures are two and a half times less likely to occur among heavier women. Hip fracture is a leading cause of both death and permanent disability among older women (in Great Britain, more women die from osteoporosis-related hip fracture than from breast, cervical and uterine cancer combined).
<snip>

The most extensive work of this sort has been carried out by Steven Blair and his colleagues at Dallas's Cooper Institute, involving more than 70,000 people. What they have discovered is that, quite simply, when researchers take into account the activity levels and resulting fitness of the people being studied, body mass appears to have no relevance to health whatsoever. In Blair's studies, obese people who engage in at least moderate levels of physical activity have around one half the mortality rate of sedentary people who maintain supposedly ideal weight levels.

..more..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ZenLefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. One piece of advice given me by a much older person
He told me as you get on in years, it's a good thing to have a little meat on your bones. That can really help if you have a battle with cancer or pneumonia or something. You don't have to be vastly obese, but having some body fat can help out when all your other body functions quit for a while.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheWhoMustBeObeyed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Extra weight can also help women fight osteoporosis and other
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 12:36 AM by SheWhoMustBeObeyed
post-menopausal symptoms because estrogen is stored in fat cells. Loss of estrogen contributes to the onset of osteoporosis and is a leading factor in its development in older women. And women who have been heavy all their lives develop stronger bones because they need them, and that strength stays with them longer.

(On edit - didn't see osteoporis was covered in the OP - I just skimmed it because this information has been around for years, but the medical community just doesn't give a fuck about it. Sorry!)

I had a long talk with an RN the other night and one of the things we discussed was bariatric surgery. I was under the impression that most insurers did not cover such surgical procedures, but she told me that starting in 2002 HMOs have been required to provide coverage. That goes a long way in explaining why bariatric surgery centers have been springing up like Starbucks all over the country. Follow the money, follow the money...

She also told me a ghastly story about a patient she knew whose bariatric surgery went horribly awry. The incision leaked and poisoned her and she could not eat at all. She was sustained by a 24-hour feeding IV and suffered terribly before she finally died. She was in her mid-thirties. Prior to surgery she had been obese but otherwise healthy.

It is entirely possible to be fat and fit, free of diabetes and heart disease, so long as a healthy diet and active schedule are maintained. Bariatric surgery is the latest in a long line of medical scams perpetrated on fat people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. 1 in 50 Bariatric Surgeries Result in Patient's Death
I just about fell out of my chair when I first heard that statistic. One out every 50 bariatric surgeries result in the patient dying. Is there another surgery that has been pushed so hard that has such a high death rate? Is being dead really better than being fat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. In a word
>Is being dead really better than being fat?<

Yes.

I am constantly astonished by the attitudes towards those of us who don't fit what society deems "normal". We're perceived as less than human, undeserving of the most basic of courtesies, and unable to control ourselves and our lives as well.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheWhoMustBeObeyed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. If you can recall the source for that statistic I would love to have it
Thanks! :hi:

The bariatric surgery industry says their mortality rate is .05%. Webmd.com says it's just under 1%. The kind of clinical studies that other surgical procedures are subjected to have never been performed on bariatric surgery. Actually one study was done but the industry has never released its results.

Obesity might mean slow death, but bariatric surgery can lead to a quick death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Here Ya Go:
"A recent study headed by Dr Flum in Washington which analyzed the case histories of 62,000 gastric bypass patients, found that within the first 30 days after surgery, the death rate had been 1 death every 50 surgeries. This was considerably higher than even the worst estimate. Dr Flum commented on CNN news that it was time for "a reality check on this surgery"." http://gastricbypass.netfirms.com/wlsstats.htm

Here's more:
www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0312/07/sm.10.html

www.pslgroup.com/dg/23dfca.htm

msnbc.msn.com/id/4711686/

www.detnews.com/2004/health/0402/29/health-77006.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheWhoMustBeObeyed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Excellent, thanks!
The first link you have listed is one that I bookmarked over a year ago but was having no luck loading when I tried to check it recently, so I was afraid the site had disappeared. The others are very useful too. Thanks again!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
classics Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
31. The actual death rate is more like 20% after 2 years. (10 in 50).
They absolutely will not track patrients beyond 1 year because after 1 year the effects of prolonged malnutrition, internal bleeding and multiple organ failures start to kill the patients.

Those that dont die almost universally gain back all the weight they lost, plus have to suffer that along with the life long effects of starvation.

That bariatric mutilation doesnt work (and never has) is the ultimate proof that fat people are not fat from eating. If you cut out most of someones stomach and intestines and they stay fat while starving literally to death, it should tell you something.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZenLefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #3
16. The candidates for that surgery should be very few
There's fat, and there's fat. There's Mike Tyson fat, and there's John Candy fat. The Mike Tysons of the world may live a very long and healthy life, but the John Candys die before their time.

My brother in law tipped the scales at about 450 pounds. That is a very, very heavy person. At age 30, he was having problems blacking out and losing consciousness for no apparent reason. They had no money (I mean NO money) so they couldn't go to a doctor. A week after his last episode, he died of a heart attack while climbing a short flight of stairs. No surprise that he died, and nobody put a gun to his head and told him to eat as much as he did. But that's scant consolation to the wife and two daughters he left behind.

If people want to have bariatric surgery just so they can look like the model girl for Victoria's Secret, well, they're Fucked In The Head. But I think there are life or death cases where this kind of surgery is seen to be the only way to go. I know one lady who's had it, and she's in the same boat my brother in law was in all those years ago. Her life is now upside down thanks to the surgery, her eating schedule is absurd, she's had a few scares and problems here and there. But she feared that without it, she'd be dead very soon. She was to the point she could not even walk around the block without raising her heart rate to a dangerous level. Perhaps she should have tried harder on her diet, but when it gets to that point, dieting alone won't make her healthy fast enough. She felt she was in danger of dying any day.

Yeah, that surgery is drastic as hell, but I do think there are cases where it may be preferable. I don't know, and I hate to judge. Perhaps she should have just dieted to lose the weight. But diets fail; we're all human and not one of us can say that losing weight is easy. In the end, the decision is hers. I have a real problem stating what she should or should not do since I can't walk in her shoes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samurai_Writer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #16
21. You would think that surgery would be reserved for extreme cases
However, a person only has to be 100 pounds overweight to qualify for this surgery. I'm 5'10" and about 280# -- supposedly 150# over my 'ideal' weight. However, I have perfect blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, etc. I am active and have good muscle tone beneath all this fat. I'm also a BBW model and have no lack of work, so I can't look too bad, either. ;)

I have six friends from work alone who have had this surgery in the past year. One of them had extreme complications, the others are doing OK.

If you are 200 pounds or more overweight and having serious health problems, I could see that one might want to do something drastic to improve their health. But a LOT of people are having this surgery unnecessarily, just because their doctors scare them to death telling them they will die young if they don't lose 100 pound, even though besides being overweight, they are healthy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZenLefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #21
43. I agree
This surgery is drastic, and should only be used in life-or-death circumstances.

I think doctors are trying to help and they mean well, but they're strung out too far, seeing too many patients and trying to do too much to help them. Every time I go to my doctor, he looks for a pill for me to take to cure me. I don't want a pill; I want to know what I need to be doing differently to correct my health.

And then there are patients who, unlike me, just want that magical pill to make everything better. Less effort that way. A doctor tells them to eat less and exercise more, and the news is not always taken well. They'd rather take a pill that melts the fat away than go to the gym 3 nights per week. Who can blame them, though - in our society most people are too busy just working or making ends meet to get to the gym. And at the end of a stressful day, we all know which plate wins the battle. Steamed Vegetables with Rice vs. Taco Bell. Hmmm... :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
29. nobody put a gun to his head?
if he had psychological reasons for eating the way he did, there may as well have been a gun put to his head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuffragetteSal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. skittles
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 01:58 PM by SuffragetteSal
....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. It's not psychological.
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 01:52 PM by Liberal_Guerilla
It would be a physiological disorder of the brain, which can effect metabolic processes. We have to come away from viewing obesity as a psychological dysfunction that can be treated with behavior modification or analysis. It is an actual chemical disorder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #35
40. either way
I don't think people "choose" their way to horrific obesity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZenLefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Skittles,
I knew my brother in law since before he was my brother in law. I'd say I knew him very well when he died. I'm not going to go into a lot of details, but I know that some of his obesity was due to external factors and his own genetics. That being said, I would say it was about 20% outside of his control, and 80% within his control. Sorry, but I think the majority of the responsibility lies with him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thione1n Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #3
24. This is incorrect information.
Estrogen, and the dominance of estrogen at menopause, is very bad for women, and increases osteoporosis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. Pretty extensive study done here.
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 12:16 AM by Liberal_Guerilla
However, Good luck changing the culture in the medical field regarding this issue. For some reason medicine seems to get entrenched and stay entrenched in what they believe. They're about as flexible as the Vatican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DANDI Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
4. If that's true
then I'm well on my way to immortality. Super-Size those fries, please! lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Digit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
6. War on OBESITY
The news in my area often touts a headline of, "The War on Obesity" like it is the biggest THREAT in the world today.
What about the economy, the environment, unemployment, the deficit, terrorism, our soldiers dying overseas, corporate greed, the medicare debacle, social security, and our administration favoring the large pharmaceutical companies?
Besides, it encourages hate crimes and discrimination.
I am so sick of the media and their spin I have turned off my TV.
Not only will my utility bills go down, I don't have to listen to such trivial crap.
Jeez, the media needs to get a grip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #6
28. Follow the money..again.. Insurers can (and will) charge more
for coverage.. There was a time when the whole of society was insurable (at a fair cost), then they started surcharging smokers,then pre-existing conditions/family histories , and now wieght charts will decide who pays more..

The basic fact is that EVERYONE WILL DIE..from something..

We have all known "healthy, thin and fit" people who just dropped dead in their tracks...and we have all known people who smoked , drank, over-ate and lived to be ancient..

Humans have so many variables, and "one size" does NOT fit all.. It never did and it never will..

The people with power over us, will manage to grab every dollar they can from us, while telling us that it's OUR OWN FAULT, because we are too fat,or too lazy or too self-indulgent..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
37. the media has a war on obesity, not regular folks
The media tells us all that we're not thin-, rich-, sexy-, pretty-, witty-, clean smelling-enough 24 hours a day, 365 day/year...

you can argue with them all day long that a skinny person can be just as unhealthy as an obese person and that a fat person can be in better physical shape than a thin one, but they are going to stick to the mandate that weight=ugly and bad because the media 'powers that be' can't get a woody from looking at a person with weight on them.

it's natural to put on weight as one ages--every other animal on the planet puts on weight as it ages, but the media wants us all to believe that something is wrong with us for being what we are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
7. This is a really deep and important article
Thanks very much for posting it.


"Thinness has a metaphorical significance in America today. Americans - and especially American elites - value thinness for precisely the same reason someone suffering from anorexia nervosa does: because not eating means not giving in to desire. Strangely, what the American elites consider most desirable is a body whose appearance signals a triumph of the will over desire itself. Thus, bodily virtue is not so much indicated by thinness per se, but rather by an achieved thinness. Ultimately the war on fat is both a cause and a consequence of the transformation of the Protestant work ethic into the American diet ethic.

The obesity myth thrives in contemporary America because America is an eating-disordered culture. Moreover, the prime symptoms of this situation - our increasing rates of "overweight", bulimia and anorexia - are also symptoms of, and have become metaphors for, a broader set of cultural anxieties.

Americans worry, with good reason, that we have become too big for our own good: that we consume too much, too quickly; that our cars, our houses, and our shopping malls are too large; that our imperial ambitions to make the world safe for democracy and McDonald's are too grand. Under these circumstances, obsessing about the 10lb of "extra" weight that the average American adult has gained over the past 15 years has become a convenient way of avoiding a more direct engagement with any number of issues regarding America's excesses.

For upper-class Americans in particular, it's easier to deal with anxiety about excessive consumption by obsessing about weight, rather than by actually confronting far more serious threats to our social and political health. We may drive environmentally insane SUVs that dump untold tonnes of hydrocarbons into the atmosphere; we may consume a vastly disproportionate share of the world's diminishing natural resources; we may support a foreign policy that consists of throwing America's military weight around without regard to objections from our allies - but at least we don't eat that extra cookie when it's offered to us

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
12. So, are you saying you don't believe obesity isn't a health issue?
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 01:11 AM by Susang
I would have to disagree with you. This country (and the world) have gotten significantly fatter in the last 30 years, resulting in skyrocketing rates of cases of childhood type 2 diabetes and other metabolic disorders, high cholesterol and heart disease, stroke and cancer.

http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/nutrit/pubs/statobes.ht...


Overweight, Obesity & Lifespan Research Findings

* People who are overweight (aged 40) are likely to die at least three years sooner than those who are normal weight.
* Obese smokers (aged 40) are likely to die 13-14 years sooner than non-smokers of normal weight.
* In terms of life expectancy, being fat during middle age is on a par with smoking.
* Overweight, non-smokers lost an average of three years.
* Obese female non-smokers lost an average 7.1 years.
* Obese male non-smokers lost 5.8 years.
* Whites who lived the longest had a BMI ranging from 23 to 25; for blacks the range was 23 to 30. Why blacks can be heavier than whites and not face the same risk of shorter life spans is unclear. Researchers consider it may be linked to fat distribution in the body.
* White morbidly obese men - with BMIs over 45 - lost up to 13 years of life.
* White morbidly obese women lost as many as eight


Sources include: Journal of the American Medical Association; Jan. 7, 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine

on edit: Where did Paul Campos get his medical degree anyway? Just curious. This story reads suspiciously like the stories that try to debunk global warming by attacking the science with their pseudo-science.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheWhoMustBeObeyed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. I am saying obesity alone is not a death sentence
Sedentary lifestyle and consumption of processed foods are the factors that make obesity deadly. But they're deadly for everyone. Fat people have been around as long as everyone else; it's lifestyle changes over the past 100 years that have contributed to health problems among people of all body types. People who were normal weight when young will have problems if they gain weight as they age, but that's not the same as being born fat.

Doctors always seem almost dismayed to find I'm not diabetic or suffering from heart disease. Fuck them. Whatever eventually kills me, it won't be my fat ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wapsie B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Amen to that.
Just like I say to those who think being thin will solve all their problems,"Congratulations, you'll never die."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. I'll answer my own question-he's a law professor, not a doctor
Just the person I want making my health care decisions for me. I'm sure his years of studying and teaching tort reform will serve me well in determining what my ideal BMI is for my frame. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheWhoMustBeObeyed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. ?
Not clear on how his conclusions affect how you make your own health care decisions. You can determine your ideal BMI using the NIH and AMA sources you cite - which, as the article states:

"According to the public health establishment's current BMI definitions, Brad Pitt, Michael Jordan and Mel Gibson are all 'overweight', while Russell Crowe, George Clooney and baseball star Sammy Sosa are all 'obese'."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ForrestGump Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 03:32 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. My 'ideal' BMI had me at something like 182 lbs (6'5")
I'd be dead, or close to it, at that weight. Though I could certainly drop some poundage, I can see how I'd be classed as 'obese' if Russell Crowe and George Clooney were in that category. And Brad Pitt is overweight? Really?

So, yeah, under those laughable definitions I can see how being overweight wouldn't necessarily affect health negatively. And I DO think that people -- older people for sure -- may well tend to be more robust with more 'meat' on their frame...heck, I'd not discount anything because people's physiologies are so variable. I certainly know people who'd qualify as obese (what's that? 30 lbs over 'ideal'?) who are very active and appear fit in many ways, sometimes even aerobically.

On the other hand, I think that some of us are liable to jump on this article's alleged accuracy as a case of wishful thinking. There's no doubt in my mind that morbid obesity -- or whatever you choose to call people who are overweight to the point that mobility suffers (as just one external indicator) or who weighs 100 or whatever arbitrary number of pounds over typical weight -- is not a healthy condition. Humans were not meant to get that big, and rarely did before industrial times. If the findings presented above are true only within a BMI context that classifies Brad Pitt as overweight then they're meaningless. Or, at least, no more meaningful than that conventional wisdom that some adipose load ain't such a bad thing.

The US does have an obesity epidemic...it's not some neofascist skinnyperson lie designed to make the big-boned feel bummed, and where it really is shameful is among children. Check out statistics on fast-food consumption (not that many 'home-cooked' prepared foods are any better), frequency and duration (and character and intensity) of physical activity, and just look at the marketplace loaded with 'labor-saving'devices and it's no surprise that American girths are expanding. Unfortunately, media messages reinforce both the perceived need to dump all fat and the need to do it instantly -- instant fixes have always sold well in the US, and the national attention span grows ever shorter -- and give us fertile ground for deadly conditions related to eating disorders, quack medicine, and the like.

The Buddhists had it right (okay, so maybe that dude didn't heed his own advice in a dietary sense) with the idea of the Middle Path...take a sane approach to diet and exercise and, all things being equal, you'll be okay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #17
25. Have you seen Sammy Sosa lately?
He isn't known for being thin. As a matter of fact, the Cubs have battled him over his weight for years now.

As for Brad Pitt's BMI (and all the other celebrities mentioned), the author is obviously speaking out of his ass. I don't know if you realize this, but that "fact" he cited comes from a food industry lobbying group, The Center for Consumer Freedom. They call themselves a non-profit, but I work in the food service industry and I know for a fact that they are indeed a front for the industry.

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/main_faq.cfm

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm?ARTIC...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pow_Wow Donating Member (378 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 07:14 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. not sure what to believe anymore
but my experience doesn't lead me to necessarily trust doctors any more than lawyers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #12
22. as someone who is not an expert
by any means on this issue, I certainly hope I haven't passed along pseudo-science by posting this.

>>"This story reads suspiciously like the stories that try to debunk global warming by attacking the science with their pseudo-science."<<

I have a great interest in climate change/global warming and understand how the waters can indeed be muddied by pseudo-studies and pseudo-science.

In this case I felt the Guardian to be a relatively reputable source and the studies cited compelling.

I gather you feel the sources for your data more legitimate than the ones in the article.
I welcome further enlightenment on this topic.








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Paul Campos will be on a panel on Book TV today
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 11:48 AM by meluseth
And I don't think most people read the entire article, especially the parts about trying to make black girls feel bad about their bodies, etc.

Doctors used to believe in leeches, too, but they were wrong.

5PM ET/2PM PT
Panel: Manufacturing Fear: American Culture Today

Michael Ignatieff, "The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age
of Terror"
Michael Shermer, "The Science of Good & Evil: Why People
Cheat, Gossip, Care, Share, and Follow the Golden Rule"
Paul Campos, "The Obesity Myth: Why America's
Obsession with Weight Is Hazardous to Your Health"
Barry Glassner, "The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are
Afraid of the Wrong Things"Moderator

Edited to add info.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #22
39. Paul Campos was the source in this case
A law professor and columnist from Colorado who's stumping for his controversial new book. I did a little checking in the last 12 hours. Many of his sources are lobbying organizations for the restaurant and package food industry.

When compared with the massive amount of scientific and medical literature that refutes his "facts", having only read the article, not the book, I'm still going to have to say that I stand by my initial reaction. However, in fairness, I do plan on reading the book when it is out (April 27th, according to Amazon). I don't plan on judging the entire book based on one article in the Guardian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
26. Did you actually read the entire article?
He agrees that morbid obesity is not healthy, and is associated with increased risk of heart disease, etc.

He's talking about people who are 30, 40, or 50 pounds overweight, and in good cardiovascular condition, as compared to thinner people, who are sedentary. Or young women who obsess about losing 10 pounds.

More importantly, he is not talking so much about health, as he is about culture, and class, and race, and gender.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. yes, I thought he made
some very needed observations on our culture also. In general people obsess over weight not because of health but because of image.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuffragetteSal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
30. of course I believe anything the AMA claims
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 01:28 PM by SuffragetteSal
but how nice of you to take the time to tell us these facts!

On your edit, and where did Paul Campos get his degree...remember our own leader claims to have a Yale/harward education...(can you hear my laughing?)

Tell this lady who ordered a shot of tequila on her 100th bd or my aunt Gret who smoked and drank her entire life and is still around at 83. http://www.freelancenews.com/news/newsview.asp?c=104372

P.S. Are you skinny dear?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
32. These numbers are bullshit.
How do they know that obese female non-smokers lost an average 7.1 years? They do not. They are comparing people based on the weight criteria. They do not take into account genetic disposition and numerous other environmental and physiological factors. They are indeed comparing apples and oranges and and are hoping that you don't notice.

The only thing that these studies do is embolden society/insurance companies to discriminate against people based on their appearance. You know that black people have a higher rate of blood pressure than whites, should we deny them insurance based on their skin color?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. No, but thanks for that lovely strawman
What it means is that if blacks (or any other demographic group) have a higher statistical incidence of high blood pressure, then doctors must be instructed to look out for that particular disorder when treating patients of that group. It's good medicine that can prolong lives.

And as far as these studies existing solely to enable insurance companies to discriminate against people, all I can say is that you must not know any research scientists. If you did, you wouldn't have such a ridiculously simplistic view of what they do. Should we abandon all research because it may offend someone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. Look at the facts.
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 02:00 PM by Liberal_Guerilla
Research can and does get manipulated to meet the needs of who ever is paying for the research. The statistics above are simplistic and do not take into account for all the countless variables that exist to make us all individuals.

On edit: Furthermore, The comparison between obese people being denied insurance based on their obesity and comparing it to what would happen if insurance companies denied african americans insurance based on the statistics that they are black and therefore more likely to develop certain diseases. That is the same discrimination that obese people experience.

The only insurance that an obese person can get is through a jobs group coverage, good luck trying to get it on your own. And it doesn't matter if you have excellent vitals and all your blood work shows that you are healthy. It doesn't matter if you excercise 5x a week. You will be denied/discriminated against.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #12
41. Don't the schools teach scientific reasoning anymore?
This is all correlational. There are no controls for other factors. Hint--that an increase in the number of cases of public inebriation correlates with an increase in the number of preachers DOES NOT establish that preachers drive people to drink, or that communities hire more preachers when confronted with more drunks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 02:38 AM
Response to Original message
18. yep, and my big fat ass
has saved me numerous times when I got really drunk and fell down.

A scrawny person would probably have broken something. I just bounced.

Kind of like the Mars lander.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
38. I used to think that, but now...
I don't.

I was a very skinny kid but filled out in high school. Was somewhat athletic and toned.

But around my Sr. year in college, the weight started creeping on. by 32, I'd gained 160 pounds - but still felt good cardio-wise.

At the urging of my wife, I got a physical. High cholesterol. Borderline high blood pressure. Close to diabetic. But I felt good, damnit!

No for long, the doctor said. As you get up in your 30s, it will catch up to you in a bad way. The doctor said I felt good by benefit of being in good shape health wise for a long time before the weight came on.

So I went on a diet. Lost 110 pounds so far. It has been pretty easy. And I do feel different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Sep 18th 2014, 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC