Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (chino tradicional)
日本語 (japonés)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandés)
Български (búlgaro)
Čeština (checo)
Dansk (danés)
Deutsch (alemán)
English (inglés)
Español de Hispanoamérica
Ελληνικά (griego)
Français (francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (húngaro)
Nederlands (holandés)
Norsk (noruego)
Polski (polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português-Brasil (portugués de Brasil)
Română (rumano)
Русский (ruso)
Suomi (finés)
Svenska (sueco)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraniano)
Comunicar un error de traducción
And I completely agree with you there, but - again, in case you missed it - the problem is that the metrics we are using to define obesity aren't a reliable set of metrics.
(i'll explain later if noone else does)
I was just about to mention the same thing.
But tons of them (heh heh) at McDonalds and pizza places and definitely at Arby's.
Deliverymen are also fat, most of the times.
I like fat people, even if i am not fat myself!
Except that it really isn't a decent general model. Re-read this passage from The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism:
"However, large-scale studies have shown that increased body mass index (BMI; weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) was not associated with increased mortality. In fact, overweight subjects (BMI, 25–29.9 kg/m2) survive longer than normal-weight subjects, and only persons with severe obesity, defined as BMI of at least 35 kg/m2, are at increased risk of early death."
Does that sound like a 'decent general model' to you?
These are results that have been found in study after study. BMI, as it is currently defined and used, really is borderline junk science. Part of the key here is to understand that BMI was a standard that was created and adopted before there was, by-and-large, any rigorous scientific research into these issues - before scientifically backed methods of assessing a person's health were created. BMI sticks around simply because it has been used for decades, not because BMI provides an accurate methodology for assessing an individual's health or even the health of a group of people.
I find that perfectly reasonable *[side-note below], and I would point out I previously stated "Without a doubt, obesity is a public health issue".
My point was never that weight is not a health issue nor that it is not an issue of significant concern from a public health standpoint. My point is simply that BMI and any statistics derived from BMI are not reliable data sets.
*As a fun little side note, I've actually seen a researcher who scientifically compared people's personal assessments of a person's health status based upon casual visual observations of a person's weight vs BMI's assessment of health status and the researcher found that the casual observations were a better predictor of negative health outcomes than BMI is (though, I'm not sure that researcher's sample size was large enough in their comparison for statistical significance).
Eld3r, I'm sorry but you really need to read a bit more carefully. I'll state, using the exact same words, for a third time here: "Without a doubt, obesity is a public health issue" and for the second time "My point was never that weight is not a health issue"
You seem to have somehow missed those statements.
Being fat in the US is actually more common among the poor than among the rich.
The rich are eating kale salads with blueberries and stuff like that at Whole Foods. Healthy food relatively high in nutrients and low in calories. Also relatively expensive in terms of price per calorie.
Stuff like McDonald's is for middle class and poor people.
And when I say "rich" I mean pretty high income, not "rich" like Bill Gates.