J_Fisher Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 This just in from the NYT... Some Extra Heft May Be Helpful, New Study Says By GINA KOLATA Published: April 20, 2005 People who are overweight but not obese have a lower risk of death than those of normal weight, federal researchers are reporting today. The researchers - statisticians and epidemiologists from the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - also found that increased risk of death from obesity was seen for the most part in the extremely obese, a group constituting only 8 percent of Americans. And being very thin, even though the thinness was longstanding and unlikely to stem from disease, caused a slight increase in the risk of death, the researchers said. The new study, considered by many independent scientists to be the most rigorous yet on the effects of weight, controlled for factors like smoking, age, race and alcohol consumption in a sophisticated analysis derived from a well-known method that has been used to predict cancer risk. It also used the federal government's own weight categories, which define fatness and thinness according to a "body mass index" correlating weight to height, regardless of sex. For example, 5-foot-8 people weighing less than 122 pounds are underweight. If they weighed 122 to 164 pounds, their weight would be normal. They would be overweight at 165 to 196, obese at 197 to 229, and extremely obese at 230 or over. Researchers had a full gamut of responses to the unexpected findings, being reported today in The Journal of the American Medical Association. Read the rest of the article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/20/health/20fat.html?8br My 2 cents: The study is silly because (1) It looks at mortality instead of death from disease, etc. Skinnier people are presumably much more active and thus more likely to die in accidents. Perhaps more importantly, (2) the study uses the gov'ts rather silly "body mass index" as it's proxy for measuring fatness. B/c BMI is simply a ratio of weight to height, fit people with higher percentages of muscle, which obviously is heavier than fat, tend to get lumped in with those who are simply carrying an extra 20 pounds of blubber. But I'm sure this study will be of great benefit to millions who use it as a rationale for the super-size at McD's. Discuss... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chirp Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 Body weight is and has been an overrated issue in climbing. Obviously if you are big and flabby your performance is going to suffer, but being a little "big" is NOT a super big deal IMHO. I personally would rather be fully nourished than burning my own muscle to keep alive. I went thru a bout with anorexia in the mid 80's and whittled my current 170 frame down to 119...I couldnt climb and I was always sleepy and cold. I learned a big lesson. I remember a quote by Catherine Destivelle that said, I would rather be a few kilos overweight than always hungry There are always exceptions to the rules but if you need some examples, look at Catherine D, Klem Loskot, John Dunne...the list can go on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 I'd rather have a high BMI from being muscular than from being a fat tub of lard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crux Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 One dismissive interpretation: Because so many Americans now consume several hundred dollars per month on prescription drugs to control diseases secondary to obesity, they don't die as early as they did ten years ago. Thus, by the reasoning employed, being fat isn't such a health problem after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squid Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Bring back the wolves and let them thin the herd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 So do you think the odds are on this GINA KOLATA being a fatty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stinkybritches Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 There are islands in the south pacific where I would be king and DRU would be my "little buddy" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crux Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 So do you think the odds are on this GINA KOLATA being a fatty? Actually, yes, I'd likely favor those odds. However, as with some of the questions in the microbiology exams given in the course for which Kolata's book on the 1918 flu was required reading, the odds might lead me to a wrong answer. As evidenced by her pre-2003 PR photo, Kolata is looking good: Admittedly, the odds may still be well placed on fatty, and as surely as personal bias may have determined which study Kolata seized for coverage in her NYT column, it also determines the definition of what is fatty. For example, my fat microbiology professor would certainly call Kolata thin. But she would call ME thin also, despite abundant fat to the contrary: I'm 6-0, 215, and my old Levi's fit me as tight as my bones. Of course, I can't say for sure whether Kolata has similarly put on some pounds without a hands-on evaluation. Now, as much as I'd like to assess whether Gina Kolata can wear her old Levis, I am resigned to no better activity than finding the recent JAMA issue and evaluating for myself what kind of quackery it is that suggests I'm better off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lummox Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 i am down with the ladies who like me chubby. hehehehe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 I'd like to see mortality versus weight broken down by age group. I suspect that if you are older, being skinny would hurt you with regard to surviving prolonged illness. A skinny, younger, active person, would have greater resistence to disease. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashw_justin Posted May 17, 2005 Share Posted May 17, 2005 Shit the risk of death is 100%... but nobody likes to haul around a dead fatass. -skinny dude, jammin' till the famine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whirlwind Posted May 17, 2005 Share Posted May 17, 2005 Body weight is and has been an overrated issue in climbing. Obviously if you are big and flabby your performance is going to suffer, but being a little "big" is NOT a super big deal IMHO. I personally would rather be fully nourished than burning my own muscle to keep alive. I went thru a bout with anorexia in the mid 80's and whittled my current 170 frame down to 119...I couldnt climb and I was always sleepy and cold. I learned a big lesson. I remember a quote by Catherine Destivelle that said, I would rather be a few kilos overweight than always hungry There are always exceptions to the rules but if you need some examples, look at Catherine D, Klem Loskot, John Dunne...the list can go on. i don't see somone my size ever craking 5.14s, im 6'1 185-190lbs, for example a little kid can get perfect hand jams in a 1/2 in crack but i can't till 1-2.5 in. hand size does make a difference and so does body size Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted May 17, 2005 Share Posted May 17, 2005 Body weight is and has been an overrated issue in climbing. Obviously if you are big and flabby your performance is going to suffer, but being a little "big" is NOT a super big deal IMHO. I personally would rather be fully nourished than burning my own muscle to keep alive. I went thru a bout with anorexia in the mid 80's and whittled my current 170 frame down to 119...I couldnt climb and I was always sleepy and cold. I learned a big lesson. I remember a quote by Catherine Destivelle that said, I would rather be a few kilos overweight than always hungry There are always exceptions to the rules but if you need some examples, look at Catherine D, Klem Loskot, John Dunne...the list can go on. i don't see somone my size ever craking 5.14s, im 6'1 185-190lbs, for example a little kid can get perfect hand jams in a 1/2 in crack but i can't till 1-2.5 in. hand size does make a difference and so does body size klem loskot is 6'2" 200 lbs and he climbs 5.14d and v15 so sack it up you lazy bellinghamster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whirlwind Posted May 20, 2005 Share Posted May 20, 2005 ok your right, but i bet he is one of the few that can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 what about John Dunn...or the east coast's own Doug Reed (he's 6-6 and huge, climbs 13+)...hell, the latest shots of sharma have him lookin around 165 - 170 at 5-11, i'm guessing? he hardly looks anorexic There's kids i know that are over 190 and some over 200 that crank v10 and harder and redpoint 5.13...and that's locally... I don't buy that size is an issue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelawgoddess Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 well, of course it's not for you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 I don't climb v10 nor redpoint 5.13...maybe i should eat some more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomtom Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 She's not talking about climbing ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelawgoddess Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 She's not talking about climbing ... exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 ahhhhh....sheeeit! Well, i guess size isn't really an issue for me, then! FUCK I HATE THIS PLACE/JOB/SITUATION... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill_Simpkins Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 I ran into a lard ass bouldering recently sending everything in site, on site. I'm 15 pounds overweight now. This guy was at least 40-50 pounds overweight. He had super-strenth hands and great technique. I bet he could send some wild stuff if he dropped the pounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.