3
   

Is fat unattractive?

 
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 06:39 am
HofT wrote:
A recent study in The Lancet confirmed that obesity is linked with twice the risk of death or severe illness as smoking a pack a day for decades

How much obesity, and by what measure? The right part of your equation is quantified, the left part is not.
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 06:58 am
The original study is published at The Lancet - as you know a respected medical journal - and their statistics are available only to subscribers. I checked them and they've been punctilious to the 95% statistical level; however I'll see if I can extract only the statistical part and re-post it here without breach of user agreement (you understand my access is work-related!)

In any event I've been running simulations with massive databases worldwide and the statistics concerning insurance payouts to smokers vs fatties are significant to over 99% - more than sufficient for all mathematical applications in this field.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 08:13 am
HofT wrote:
In any event I've been running simulations with massive databases worldwide and the statistics concerning insurance payouts to smokers vs fatties are significant to over 99% - more than sufficient for all mathematical applications in this field.

Sure -- I do trust your sources and your qualifications, and my only problem is the lack of quantification on the "obesity" side. You said obese people are twice as likely as one-pack-a-day smokers to die from some lethal disease. How obese do they have to be to reach that specific risk level? For example, which BMI, or which percentage of body fat? No study needed, just one approximate number is fine.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 08:17 am
Reminds me of an antismoking blurb I recently read. It said that the second hand smoke from one cigarette was more toxic than automotive exhaust fumes. One side very nicely quantified.
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 08:42 am
Thomas - it is not "I" who quantified "twice as likely" it's The Lancet study; addressing your question to me, it's "how clean is my data?" to which I have to answer "I don't know for sure".

If you plan to do a major regression on a large database, check also for Alzheimers' diagnoses upon death - they're the real killers for medical insurers, considering the length of caregiving required to those afflicted - and see the difference (of the order of a negative correlation at 95% confidence limit) you get by the fact that Alzheimer's patients were non-smokers, though not obese - the obese non-smokers died way before them. The data is corrupted by any number of factors, unfortunately, so I can't answer you with more precision than that at this point, other than to say ceteris paribus any BMI over 20 is reason for caution:)
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 08:47 am
HofT wrote:
The data is corrupted by any number of factors, unfortunately, so I can't answer you with more precision than that at this point, other than to say ceteris paribus any BMI over 20 is reason for caution:)

Alright, then I have no reason for caution. My BMIs are exactly 20, it's just that I have two of them. Wink
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 09:02 am
Thomas - the good news in your case is that DNA wasn't considered so far in my Fourier transforms; if everyone in your family (blood relatives only) was chubby and still lived to an advanced age you'll probably be OK as well.

FYI, the FDA has just approved a heart disease medication specifically for black people and many other medications calibrated to DNA are in the pipeline. If you exclude blacks and hispanics from the statistical samples your chances of an early death diminish considerably no matter what your BMI - though for the record the Lancet study only included white women, and while I've no way of knowing if you're black I don't believe you to be a woman Smile
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 09:09 am
http://lib1.store.vip.sc5.yahoo.com/lib/alight-com/beautypower.jpg
Most of these women would be considered "heavy" by today's disgustingly thin standards....considering this is from a Plus Size online catalog.

I think they all look gorgeous! (Just thought I'd throw this in since we are talking about attractivness and all. )

Now this is not attractive to me. Arrow Yuck

And this Arrow Yuck
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 09:23 am
Thomas - all I can post from The Lancet is the publicly available synopsis at this link:
http://www.thelancet.com/

However the researchers will e-mail you their statistical analysis if you ask for it. See you next week sometime Smile
0 Replies
 
dora17
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 11:57 am
littlek wrote:
dora - really?


no, not really. I just didn't want to admit to posting that much simply because I'm addicted to the site and have nothing else going on. Embarrassed
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 12:40 pm
Yeah, Bella, they look fine to me. Real fine.
0 Replies
 
Slappy Doo Hoo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 02:03 pm
littlek wrote:
<sigh>

I have to ask. Slappy, is 5'5" and 145 overweight?


Uh, you're obviously asking me if I think YOU are overweight, and no, I don't think you look overweight.

5'9, 170 just sounds heavy for a woman...obviously not all people carry their weight the same. All I know is I wouldn't date a woman who's bodyweight was that close to mine.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 02:20 pm
It depends on where the fat is located. Boobs are almost all fat.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 02:24 pm
cjhsa wrote:
It depends on where the fat is located. Boobs are almost all fat.


Shocked Laughing
0 Replies
 
SaRaBaRa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 05:34 pm
I can so respond to this...Beauty is what lies on the inside of a person not on the out...there are plenty of men out there who love bigger women'the more bounce for the more ounce' Take it from me... I am a big girl, but for some reason of all the times that I began feeling like I would never be excepted as pretty to a guy...I have guys chasing me literally from every angle...I love it...cuz I play hard 2 get, and from that I get what I want! If u feel confident on your body image than that is all that counts, don't try to change for someone else...change only if u want 4 urself!
0 Replies
 
husker
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 05:48 pm
Here's a snapshot of the 10 leading killers of American men in 2002:

Rank Cause Percentage of male deaths
1 Heart disease 28.4
2 Cancer 24.1
3 Unintentional injuries 5.8
4 Stroke 5.2
5 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) 5.1
6 Diabetes 2.8
7 Influenza and pneumonia 2.4
8 Suicide 2.1
9 Kidney disease 1.6
10 Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 1.5
Total 79

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2004
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 06:34 pm
Slappy, I admitted to it a few posts after that one you quoted. My point was that you can't always go by the numbers, even though insurance companies do.

I do see your point about dating someone your own size being weird sometimes. I dated a guy who was my height, but much more muscular (wasn't a weight issue I had) - the height thing kind of threw me.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 06:50 pm
Not all insurance companies do go by BMI. It was quite popular 10-15 years ago. Has been moving out of favour since by a number of the larger LTD carriers. The actuaries found it wasn't giving them the results they were hoping for when reserving.

one recent study

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=26071


Quote:
BMI Does Not Predict MICU Outcome
14 Jun 2005

Patients who are obese are not at greater risk of morbidity, mortality, or increased costs in the Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU), according to new findings. Researchers in Allentown, PA, recorded the height, weight, age, hospital length of stay, medical complications, and other variables of 813 patients admitted to the MICU between January 1997 and August 2001.

The study subjects were divided into five groups: underweight (BMI less than 20.0), normal weight (BMI = 20.0-24.9), overweight (BMI = 25.0-29.9), obese (BMI = 30-39.9), and severely obese (BMI = 40.0 or more).

No significant difference was found between the MICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, need for mechanical ventilation or number of days on the ventilator, mortality rate, and costs for obese and very obese patients when compared to the other three groups.

The only significant difference found was that the patients who were severely obese were more likely to be female and younger than the obese patients. The study appears in the June issue of CHEST, the peer-reviewed journal of the American College of Chest Physicians.

News briefs from the journal CHEST June 2005

American College of Chest Physicians
http://www.chestnet.org
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 06:55 pm
and then there's the smoking/obesity combo - where smoking seems to be getting the big whack in this study

Quote:
June 15, 2005
Report: Obesity And Smoking Cause Premature Aging

A new study isn't intended to scare anyone, having only sampled the white blood cells of about 1,100 healthy white women. However, if you are overweight and smoke, then according to the new report, you are most likely aging faster than your slimmer non-smoking counterparts, according to published reports.

Scientists have reportedly produced the first direct evidence that the cells of obese women or those who smoke are "older" than those of other women, suggesting that these factors accelerate aging, new research shows.

A team of researchers from the United States and Britain say people who smoke cigarettes or are overweight have shorter telomeres - the caps on chromosomes - which makes them biologically older than their non-smoking, leaner counterparts, according to wire reports.

Telomeres shorten each time a cell divides.

The loss is associated with aging, which is why telomeres are thought to hold the secrets of youth and the aging process. As telomeres get smaller, the chromosomes can become unstable and increase the risk of mutation, according to wire reports.

The investigators reportedly recruited nearly 1200 women from the UK aged 18-76 years into the study. 119 of the women were obese, with a body mass index (BMI) greater than 30, and 85 women had a BMI under 20. 531 women had never smoked, 369 were ex-smokers, and just over 200 were current smokers.

Skeptics question the findings, saying the researchers had failed to rule out the possibility that other key factors could be responsible for the results. People who are overweight, for example, may not get enough exercise, which could account for premature aging.

Other researchers said the findings are provocative, and could lead to the capacity to discern the effects of fat on a molecular level at a time when public health experts are concerned about the number of overweight people.

More than two-thirds of Americans are overweight, including about one-third who are obese, raising concern the nation could be facing an epidemic of weight-related illnesses, according to published reports.

Obesity, which affects about 300 million people worldwide, increases the risk of diabetes, heart disease, stroke and several other illnesses.

Researchers have shown that cigarette smokers die on average 10 years sooner than non-smokers, but that kicking the habit can halve the risk.

Smoking is a leading cause of lung cancer and COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), which includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

It also increases the risk of heart disease.


http://www.nationalledger.com/scribe/archives/2005/06/study_obesity_a.shtml



A grain of salt is probably in order for all of these studies, Lancet or Chest or an unreferenced study in the National Ledger.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jun, 2005 07:22 pm
I would rather date a fatty than a smoker, but that's just me.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 01:58:36