Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Mon, Aug-14-17, 16:00
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 45,207
 
Plan: Paleo 99.5%
Stats: 210/170/160 Female 67.5"
BF:
Progress: 80%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default Is being overweight that bad?

Is it unhealthy to be overweight?

"Is being a little bit overweight bad for you? Could it lead to an untimely death?"
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Mon, Aug-14-17, 18:25
BDParrish BDParrish is offline
New Member
Posts: 2
 
Plan: CAD/CALP
Stats: 192.5/153.5/165.0 Male 5 ft 8 inches
BF:25%/13%/15%
Progress: 142%
Location: Winston-Salem
Default Thanks!

Enjoyed reading this which is typical of the foolishness that passes these days as obesity and weight loss research. The researcher could not understand that the "normal weight" people in her study included those who lost weight because they were sick and dying.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Aug-15-17, 18:25
mudgie mudgie is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 89
 
Plan: LCHF
Stats: 206.5/161/155 Male 69.5"
BF:20%
Progress: 88%
Location: Chicago-ish
Default

It's kind of stupid to attribute early deaths to obesity. Obesity doesn't bring about death; the things that cause obesity also cause diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and premature death. Obesity is merely one of the symptoms. Thank goodness for obesity and the cultural stigma... otherwise many would settle in their bad eating habits and die an early death. Obesity is merely the most unappealing outcome.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Tue, Aug-15-17, 20:10
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,714
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDParrish
Enjoyed reading this which is typical of the foolishness that passes these days as obesity and weight loss research. The researcher could not understand that the "normal weight" people in her study included those who lost weight because they were sick and dying.
If doctors all thought like this, women would be told to gain 15 lbs, not 26 when pregnant, just the weight of baby + amniotic fluid + an extra pound to tide them over during a momentary supermarket shutdown. But no, 26 lbs is still recommended in case Mom gets sick. Pre-mid 1970s it was common to let people carry a few extra pounds of overweight to help them get over sickness too.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Tue, Aug-15-17, 21:18
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 45,207
 
Plan: Paleo 99.5%
Stats: 210/170/160 Female 67.5"
BF:
Progress: 80%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Willet is a guy who has made a career of saying things like being even slightly overweight is equivalent to smoking a pack of cigs a day for 20 years (or something like that). He clearly blows it way out proportion.

So is one research under estimating the weight loss that people experience before they die, or is the other one over estimating it in order to get the results he would prefer to see?
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Wed, Aug-16-17, 03:53
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 9,499
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

If the researchers stopped using the BMI as a marker of health, and above 25 as overweight and therefore unhealthy, we could finally focus on a simpler measure that does indicate early health risks...

Waist to Height Ratio. WHtR

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/3/e010159

Quote:

Waist-to-height ratio as an indicator of ‘early health risk’: simpler and more predictive than using a ‘matrix’ based on BMI and waist circumference

Abstract
Objectives There is now good evidence that central obesity carries more health risks compared with total obesity assessed by body mass index (BMI). It has therefore been suggested that waist circumference (WC), a proxy for central obesity, should be included with BMI in a ‘matrix’ to categorise health risk. We wanted to compare how the adult UK population is classified using such a ‘matrix’ with that using another proxy for central obesity, waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), using a boundary value of 0.5. Further, we wished to compare cardiometabolic risk factors in adults with ‘healthy’ BMI divided according to whether they have WHtR below or above 0.5.

Setting, participants and outcome measures Recent data from 4 years (2008–2012) of the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS) (n=1453 adults) were used to cross-classify respondents on anthropometric indices. Regression was used to examine differences in levels of risk factors (triglycerides (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), TC: HDL, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting glucose, systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)) according to WHtR below and above 0.5, with adjustment for confounders (age, sex and BMI).

Results 35% of the group who were judged to be at ‘no increased risk’ using the ‘matrix’ had WHtR ≥0.5. The ‘matrix’ did not assign ‘increased risk’ to those with a ‘healthy’ BMI and ‘high’ waist circumference. However, our analysis showed that the group with ‘healthy’ BMI, and WHtR ≥0.5, had some significantly higher cardiometabolic risk factors compared to the group with ‘healthy’ BMI but WHtR below 0.5.

Conclusions Use of a simple boundary value for WHtR (0.5) identifies more people at ‘early health risk’ than does a more complex ‘matrix’ using traditional boundary values for BMI and WC. WHtR may be a simpler and more predictive indicator of the ‘early heath risks’ associated with central obesity.


This is not the only study...there have been previous ones using 300,000+ NHS records. http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthre...31&page=3&pp=15 The WHtR method does not classify a tall, muscle bound male as unhealthy and does a short, lightweight woman with a bulging waistline. Willett and the BMI method would entirely miss the Indian and Chinese diabetes epidemic where the average BMI is 23.

But by either method, the author of the original NYT article upon which this article is based, is unhealthy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/...g-age.html?_r=0 (I put that in the Oprah thread in War zone)
She whines likes she is trying to be the new Tara Parker-Pope at the NYT. Even her name reminded me of Tara. "Taffy Brodesser-Akner is a contributing writer for the magazine." Weight Loss is hard, oh woe is me, I do everything WW or the dietary guidelines say and can't lose weight.

Last edited by JEY100 : Wed, Aug-16-17 at 04:18.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Aug-16-17, 07:15
PaCarolSue PaCarolSue is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 301
 
Plan: Whatever Works
Stats: 217/199.5/195 Female 5ft 2 inches
BF:lots/lots/less
Progress: 80%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
Is it unhealthy to be overweight?

"Is being a little bit overweight bad for you? Could it lead to an untimely death?"



I am getting a "preview" of the article only, requesting that I sign up to get the whole article. Is there any way I can get around this?
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Wed, Aug-16-17, 07:19
PaCarolSue PaCarolSue is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 301
 
Plan: Whatever Works
Stats: 217/199.5/195 Female 5ft 2 inches
BF:lots/lots/less
Progress: 80%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
If the researchers stopped using the BMI as a marker of health, and above 25 as overweight and therefore unhealthy, we could finally focus on a simpler measure that does indicate early health risks...

Waist to Height Ratio. WHtR

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/3/e010159





I can give a great example of this with myself, and my SIL. We weigh about the same, but she is pear shaped, carrying her weight in her hips, thighs and butt. I am apple shaped, carrying my weight around the middle, with slim hips, thighs and butt. I have gone on to develop medical issues, such as diabetes and heart disease, and she has not. No medical issues in her 60s.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Wed, Aug-16-17, 08:21
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 1,905
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mudgie
It's kind of stupid to attribute early deaths to obesity. Obesity doesn't bring about death; the things that cause obesity also cause diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and premature death. Obesity is merely one of the symptoms. Thank goodness for obesity and the cultural stigma... otherwise many would settle in their bad eating habits and die an early death. Obesity is merely the most unappealing outcome.

This is the key. The studies and "experts" cited represent the confusion of finding the holy grail of health, in this case obesity. No epidemiologist can find a definitive root cause, only correlations. No epidemiologist can cite accurate and factual studies because they rely on questionnaires and loosely reported histories. Willett and Stokes are tiresome, but come off as very confident in their beliefs to the majority of the people reading their noise.

BMI? Wow! It's become the standard measurement of health and obesity assessment by the scientific and medical communities even though it flaunts confounding variables that must be taken into account. I read a recent paper that found that a higher BMI (whatever it represents) in older people is healthier. The beat goes on . . . .

The issue is a group of symptoms likely caused by the same condition and highly regulated by nutrition that point to the hypothetical root cause, Metabolic Syndrome and / or Insulin Resistance present the usual suspects of high blood pressure, obesity, type II diabetes, CVD, heart disease, cancer, GERD, skin problems, PCOS, IBS, sleep apnea, arthritis, and others. It's easier to focus on individual symptoms and label them diseases and develop drugs for mitigating them individually without really confirming the underlying root cause, just continuing to wave swords at windmills.

The good news is that there are some researchers and medical professionals who understand the stable of symptoms represent an underlying root cause and are developing methods and treating patients with this focus. The approach is encouraging in that simple dietary changes can have a huge effect on people presenting these symptoms, and many of us on this forum have made tremendous progress in correcting for these health issues. This is the good news, and it's starting at the grass-roots level with some experts and knowledgeable people leading the awareness and research movements. It will take some time, however, with articles like this citing those spouting the noise of unproductive points of focus.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Wed, Aug-16-17, 14:56
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is offline
Posts: 3,254
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/128/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 106%
Location: Vermont
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
But by either method, the author of the original NYT article upon which this article is based, is unhealthy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/...g-age.html?_r=0 (I put that in the Oprah thread in War zone)
She whines likes she is trying to be the new Tara Parker-Pope at the NYT. Even her name reminded me of Tara. "Taffy Brodesser-Akner is a contributing writer for the magazine." Weight Loss is hard, oh woe is me, I do everything WW or the dietary guidelines say and can't lose weight.


Mark Sisson has an interesting post about this article in the NYT.

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-t..._medium=button1

Jean
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Thu, Aug-17-17, 08:06
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 1,905
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Thanks for the link, Jean. Sisson's response is a thoughtful summary of the dilemma faced by many who are trying to achieve health using a dietary approach. There is so much conflicting information available today that it's no wonder people are confused.

The emotional response to those who recommend the vegan approach eschewing animal foods in favor of healthy plant foods makes a lot of sense on the surface, and some do well with this approach with some qualifiers of needing to get the nutrients they require through this dietary approach. However, it's critical for the individual to include vegan food sources containing essential nutrients that are readily available in animal foods to experience a complete nutritional vegan approach.

The confusion extends to all of us including my family where I noticed over the past weeks spending time with my grand daughter that where she was being fed healthy whole foods including meats and vegetables, she was also being served rice cakes and white breads for snacks as well. Now, at just about 2 years old, she may process carbs very well, but over a longer period of time, this may not be the best approach. Understanding my place as a grandfather, I did not share my thoughts. However, I know my DIL is doing what she feels is best, and I'm sure she truly believes that rice cakes are good things. She and my son are also influenced by the dietary confusion that abounds today. Very frustrating indeed!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:56.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.