Page 1 of 3 [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,573

24 Mar 2011, 3:31 pm

This is an incredibly odd poll result.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/2 ... 39267.html

To be honest , I think that campaigns against obesity are a little too much based on pseudoscience. Obesity is only correlated with health problems in extreme cases and every body is different than the other. Does that make me an evangeli.. ouch I can't even finish that sentence, I feel dirty now.


_________________
.


JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

24 Mar 2011, 3:45 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
This is an incredibly odd poll result.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/2 ... 39267.html

To be honest , I think that campaigns against obesity are a little too much based on pseudoscience. Obesity is only correlated with health problems in extreme cases and every body is different than the other. Does that make me an evangeli.. ouch I can't even finish that sentence, I feel dirty now.


another example of strange corelation.


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,634
Location: temperate zone

24 Mar 2011, 4:56 pm

Strange correlations occur. There was a global survey back in the eighties that concluded that the people with the longest lifespan in every nation on earth are [drum roll]... the obese!
But later it was pointed out that that survey didnt account for the fact that a larger percentage of thin people than fat people are smokers. The survey actually documented how deadly smoking is and not how healthy fat is.

Your survey doesnt necessarily show that white evangelicals admire obesity.

Maybe it just means they hate obama.

If Michele Obama came out against drugs,or against canibalism, they would resist those two causes too.

Not that they would become drug using canibals, but they might suddenly adopt a tolerence for doping and canibalism in their midst.

Its true that all obsesity isnt necessarily bad. In some individuals some degree of obesity is needed for optimum health.
But there is supposidly an epidemic of obesity.People (esecially children) are getting fat who didnt used to. So some kind of fatwah against fat seems to be needed.



number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

24 Mar 2011, 6:33 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Its true that all obsesity isnt necessarily bad. In some individuals some degree of obesity is needed for optimum health.


Really? That's a new one. Would you mind elaborating?



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,634
Location: temperate zone

24 Mar 2011, 7:22 pm

number5 wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Its true that all obsesity isnt necessarily bad. In some individuals some degree of obesity is needed for optimum health.


Really? That's a new one. Would you mind elaborating?


Cant claim to be an expert.
I saw a big interestng TV documentary on the obesity issue some years ago.

At one point in the show they showcased a gentlemen who had battled wieght all of his life then gave up.
He was athletic and a jogger in great form ( he won foot races) , but was a bit rotund and had a wieght that was (according to those wieght-height charts) too heavy. But it worked for him. It probably wouldve hurt his health to be thinner. He was a bit round but also had muscle tone.
He was an obese athlete.

The point being made was that with fat there is no one size fits all correct wieght.

He is probably an extreme case who isnt really a good role model for most people. But on the other hand anorexia is a common health threat. So saying "obesity is sometimes good" was porbably a bit of an overstatement. But one can go overboard with thiness.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,469

24 Mar 2011, 7:36 pm

I don't think they are for obesity; just the fact that the democratic administration is involved may be the most adverse factor for them. In general, the fear of government control might be the overriding factor; and watching Glenn Beck :wink:



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

24 Mar 2011, 11:40 pm

In geneneral, African-Americans experience the negative health problems of obesity and the negative health problems of underweight starting at higher BMIs for both. In other words, their 'healthy weight' range is higher.

It's possible for people of any 'race' to be metabolically healthy while overweight. The problems are high blood pressure, diabettes, and a lack of cardiovascular fitness; those things are often, but not always, correlated with overweight. If you are overweight but don't have those problems, you're less likely to have serious health events in the near future than someone who is thin but does have those problems.

edit: I should add that I like Ms.Obama's program because it emphasizes getting exercise and eating healthy foods more than simple weight loss.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,469

25 Mar 2011, 12:03 am

I read an article sometime ago in Discover magazine that suggested that people that are significantly overweight are more likely to have children that are less robust and don't live a full life expectancy; whereas parents that go through periods of time without enough to eat are more likely to have children that are more robust and live longer, healthier lives. I've heard that eating fewer calories might lead to a longer life, but never saw it related to one's offspring before I read this article.

The article in general was about how the behavior of one generation can influence the genetics of the next generation. There was also mention of the nicotine use of a father and a similiar impact on the next generation.

It reminded me of the phrase of how the "sins" of the father affect the son (and daughter) in this case.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,378
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

25 Mar 2011, 12:15 am

Goes to show you, the evangelical movement has become the Republican party at prayer. And their new messiah is Glenn Beck.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



ThatRedHairedGrrl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,037
Location: Walking through a shopping mall listening to Half Japanese on headphones

25 Mar 2011, 4:35 am

Correlation, first off, is not causality. That probably needs to be borne in mind in the majority of medical studies published in the media, especially those relating to weight.

In this case, the preponderance of older and African-American people in the study is likely what skewed the results. And LKL is right: weight doesn't automatically correspond to health, and many people (not just African-Americans, although the preponderance may be higher, I'm not sure of the figures) have a higher 'normal' weight than medical charts would suggest.

Interestingly, some studies have found that one of the reasons why many African-Americans are healthier at weights that would be regarded as 'unhealthy' for a white person is actually the higher degree of acceptance for larger bodies in some African-American communities. In other words, it ain't the fat itself that kills you, it's the social effects of people hating you for being fat. (Makes sense: cortisol, the hormone released when you get stressed - and being bullied and socially stigmatized is most certainly stress - has a variety of negative effects on blood pressure, glucose levels and the like...as well as leading to abdominal weight gain!) Anyone who thinks hatred is 'good for' fat people and will 'help' them become thinner might like to think about that.

In any case, there are quite a few churches I've heard of in which fatness is regarded as a 'sin', and there are even specifically evangelical Christian groups intended to produce weight loss....look up 'Weigh Down Ministries', or check out the hilariously entitled book 'Help, Lord, The Devil Wants Me Fat!'.

Yet another reason why I'm pagan...the vast majority of pagans don't see a non-media-standard body type as a moral failing.


_________________
"Grunge? Isn't that some gross shade of greenish orange?"


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,784

25 Mar 2011, 7:38 am

:roll:

Evangelicals tend to be conservatives. Conservatives generally do not think government should be micro-managing people's lives. That includes the issue of childhood obesity.

I can guarantee they didn't classify "libertarians" as a group in their survey, but if they had, you could guess what the outcome would have been.

Just another way to take something and make it political.



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,532
Location: Alberta Canada

25 Mar 2011, 8:31 am

Let me be to the point: The spouse of your leader is not an elected official, yet she gains a title, and she influences policy. If, so long ago, you gave up your royalty, why do you still have a queen?

Here in Canada our leader's partners have no title, no special status, and certainly are not a mouth piece guiding society. The unelected Queen in Britain neither formulates our laws, nor does she even sign our bills. In the UK itself, if the queen ever refused to sign a bill into law, they would ditch her PDQ. She is a figurehead there too.

Not so in America it seems, where the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Anyway, sorry about that rant. Please continue on with your veneration of the new nobility.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,573

25 Mar 2011, 10:46 am

zer0netgain wrote:
:roll:

Evangelicals tend to be conservatives. Conservatives generally do not think government should be micro-managing people's lives. That includes the issue of childhood obesity.

I can guarantee they didn't classify "libertarians" as a group in their survey, but if they had, you could guess what the outcome would have been.

Just another way to take something and make it political.
What's up then with the other religious groups that are also usually conservatives and are actually happy with this?


_________________
.


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,177
Location: Northern California

25 Mar 2011, 12:28 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
number5 wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Its true that all obsesity isnt necessarily bad. In some individuals some degree of obesity is needed for optimum health.


Really? That's a new one. Would you mind elaborating?


Cant claim to be an expert.
I saw a big interestng TV documentary on the obesity issue some years ago.

At one point in the show they showcased a gentlemen who had battled wieght all of his life then gave up.
He was athletic and a jogger in great form ( he won foot races) , but was a bit rotund and had a wieght that was (according to those wieght-height charts) too heavy. But it worked for him. It probably wouldve hurt his health to be thinner. He was a bit round but also had muscle tone.
He was an obese athlete.

The point being made was that with fat there is no one size fits all correct wieght.

He is probably an extreme case who isnt really a good role model for most people. But on the other hand anorexia is a common health threat. So saying "obesity is sometimes good" was porbably a bit of an overstatement. But one can go overboard with thiness.


The problem is one of semantics and perception. Medically speaking obesity is supposed to mean an unhealthy amount of excess weight for the individual. While it has been given an objective measurement, the medical profession knows that may not be accurate for some people, and if you are having a conversation with your doctor about your weight all that will be covered. But society seems to visulaize the term differently, taking completely normal and healthy body shapes and calling them fat or obese when they actually are not. Take a look at how many people are criticizng Michelle Obama's involvement on the issue by calling HER fat, which she absolutely isn't.

As a society, broad generalization, we no longer have an accurate vision in our heads for what a healthy body weight is supposed to look like. It's pretty disconcerting, when you think about it, because that false image leads to all sorts of inappropriate choices.

Overall, allowing yourself to fall outside of what is your natural and healthy weight range will increase the level of medical problems you experience. Happens in both directions. And allowing yourself to use unnatural means to put yourself into the healthy weight range will stress your body and add to your health issues, as well. What people need to re-learn is how to eat naturally and instinctively, but that is, unfortunately, something we left behind as a society a long time ago; it's been my personal battle all my life how messed up my food instincts have gotten. Natural and instinctive eating is something that parents like Michelle Obama are working hard to rekindle; I can see in my kids how it all works, how natural healthy eating should be, and the goal is to keep them wanting to eat the way their bodies were designed to want them to eat all their lives despite all the influences society will throw at them.


_________________
Mom to an amazing AS son, who recently graduated from the university (plus an also amazing non-AS daughter). Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,784

25 Mar 2011, 9:07 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
:roll:

Evangelicals tend to be conservatives. Conservatives generally do not think government should be micro-managing people's lives. That includes the issue of childhood obesity.

I can guarantee they didn't classify "libertarians" as a group in their survey, but if they had, you could guess what the outcome would have been.

Just another way to take something and make it political.
What's up then with the other religious groups that are also usually conservatives and are actually happy with this?


Because not all religions share the same values.

In general, the Roman Catholic Church is big time into "liberation theology" (aka Marxism). If you look at a lot of positions the RCC and it's parishes take on political issues, it's fairly left-leaning in political terms.