Photo
sourcedumal:

socimages:

Overweight Americans have the lowest risk of premature death.
By Lisa Wade, PhD
Last year the Journal of the American Medical Association released a study aiming to determine the relationship between body mass index and the risk of premature death. Body mass index, or BMI, is the ratio between your height and weight. According to the National Institutes of Health, you are “normal weight” if your ratio is between 18.5-24.9.  Everything over that is “overweight” or “obese” and everything under is “underweight.”
This study was a meta-analysis, which is an analysis of a collection of existing studies that systematically measures the sum of our knowledge.  In this case, the authors analyzed 97 studies that included a combined 2.88 million individuals and over 270,000 deaths.  They found that overweight individuals had a lower risk of premature death than so-called normal weight individuals and there was no relationship between being somewhat obese and the rate of early death. Only among people in the high range of obesity was there a correlation between their weight and a higher risk of premature death.
Here’s what it looked like.
Above is two columns of studies plotted according to the hazard ratio they reported for people.  This comparison is between people who are “overweight” (BMI = 25-29.9) and people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9).  Studies that fall below the line marked 1.0 found a lower rate of premature death and studies above the line found a higher rate.
Just by eyeballing it, you can confirm that there is not a strong correlation between weight and premature death, at least in this population. When the scientists ran statistical analyses, the math showed that there is a statistically significant relationship between being “overweight” and a lower risk of death.
Here’s the same data, but comparing the risk of premature death among people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are somewhat “obese” (BMI = 30-34.9).  Again, eyeballing the results suggest that there’s not much correlation and, in fact, statistical analysis found none.

Finally, here are the results comparing “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are quite “obese” (BMI = 35 or higher). In this case, we do see a relationship between risk of premature death in body weight.

It’s almost funny that the National Institutes of Health use the word normal when talking about BMI. It’s certainly not the norm – the average BMI in the U.S. falls slightly into the “overweight” category (26.6 for adult men and 25.5 for adult women) — and it’s not related to health. It’s clearly simply normative. It’s related to a socially constructed physical ideal that has little relationship to what physicians and public health advocates are supposed to be concerned with.  Normal is judgmental, but if they changed the word to healthy, they have to entirely rejigger their prescriptions.
So, do we even have an obesity epidemic? Perhaps not if we use health as a marker instead of some arbitrary decision to hate fat.  Paul Campos, covering this story for the New York Times, points out:

If the government were to redefine normal weight as one that doesn’t increase the risk of death, then about 130 million of the 165 million American adults currently categorized as overweight and obese would be re-categorized as normal weight instead.

That’s 79%.
It’s worth saying again: if we are measuring by the risk of premature death, then 79% of the people we currently shame for being overweight or obese would be recategorized as perfectly fine. Ideal, even. Pleased to be plump, let’s say, knowing that a body that is a happy balance of soft and strong is the kind of body that will carry them through a lifetime.
Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the co-author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.


But they ain’t trying to hear you tho. Better to hate on fat people. You’ll get more money for weight loss surgery that way

sourcedumal:

socimages:

Overweight Americans have the lowest risk of premature death.

By Lisa Wade, PhD

Last year the Journal of the American Medical Association released a study aiming to determine the relationship between body mass index and the risk of premature death. Body mass index, or BMI, is the ratio between your height and weight. According to the National Institutes of Health, you are “normal weight” if your ratio is between 18.5-24.9.  Everything over that is “overweight” or “obese” and everything under is “underweight.”

This study was a meta-analysis, which is an analysis of a collection of existing studies that systematically measures the sum of our knowledge.  In this case, the authors analyzed 97 studies that included a combined 2.88 million individuals and over 270,000 deaths.  They found that overweight individuals had a lower risk of premature death than so-called normal weight individuals and there was no relationship between being somewhat obese and the rate of early death. Only among people in the high range of obesity was there a correlation between their weight and a higher risk of premature death.

Here’s what it looked like.

Above is two columns of studies plotted according to the hazard ratio they reported for people.  This comparison is between people who are “overweight” (BMI = 25-29.9) and people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9).  Studies that fall below the line marked 1.0 found a lower rate of premature death and studies above the line found a higher rate.

Just by eyeballing it, you can confirm that there is not a strong correlation between weight and premature death, at least in this population. When the scientists ran statistical analyses, the math showed that there is a statistically significant relationship between being “overweight” and a lower risk of death.

Here’s the same data, but comparing the risk of premature death among people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are somewhat “obese” (BMI = 30-34.9).  Again, eyeballing the results suggest that there’s not much correlation and, in fact, statistical analysis found none.

30-34.9

Finally, here are the results comparing “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are quite “obese” (BMI = 35 or higher). In this case, we do see a relationship between risk of premature death in body weight.

35

It’s almost funny that the National Institutes of Health use the word normal when talking about BMI. It’s certainly not the norm – the average BMI in the U.S. falls slightly into the “overweight” category (26.6 for adult men and 25.5 for adult women) — and it’s not related to health. It’s clearly simply normative. It’s related to a socially constructed physical ideal that has little relationship to what physicians and public health advocates are supposed to be concerned with.  Normal is judgmental, but if they changed the word to healthy, they have to entirely rejigger their prescriptions.

So, do we even have an obesity epidemic? Perhaps not if we use health as a marker instead of some arbitrary decision to hate fat.  Paul Campos, covering this story for the New York Times, points out:

If the government were to redefine normal weight as one that doesn’t increase the risk of death, then about 130 million of the 165 million American adults currently categorized as overweight and obese would be re-categorized as normal weight instead.

That’s 79%.

It’s worth saying again: if we are measuring by the risk of premature death, then 79% of the people we currently shame for being overweight or obese would be recategorized as perfectly fine. Ideal, even. Pleased to be plump, let’s say, knowing that a body that is a happy balance of soft and strong is the kind of body that will carry them through a lifetime.

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the co-author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

But they ain’t trying to hear you tho. Better to hate on fat people. You’ll get more money for weight loss surgery that way

Text

well I’ll be damned

NYC is actually doing something helpful for low income families.

This year they introduced this thing called “Health Bucks”

It’s a coupon where you get $2 back for every $5 spent with EBT at a farmer’s market that accepts EBT (which I think is currently all of them in the city).

I haven’t heard much about this except just now on the local news. So, hopefully this is something that will be expanded. 

In case it’s not clear, the part that I’m impressed by is the idea of rewarding people for making a “right” choice, rather than penalizing people for making choices of necessity or convenience.

Now.

If only we could figure out a way to make these markets more expansive, or to put their goods directly into local markets that run all year long (I know with produce it would be tricky, but it’s not impossible, there’s also other things, like meat products or preserved goods, or ready-made options).

Apparently these health bucks will also be given to children and/or families that participate in cooking and nutrition classes. 

Imma have to do some more reading about the program to see how it works over all. But this seems like a pretty interesting program.

Text

pet peeve:

"it was a bipartisan decision"

it usually masks some kinda bullshit

stop that

Text

cisyphus:

Slurs are not oppressive because they are offensive, they are oppressive  because slurs by nature of being slurs draw upon certain power dynamics  to remind their target of his/her/their vulnerability in a certain relation to power and as an extension of that, to threaten violence and exploitation of that vulnerability.

(via gwest650)

Photo
frektane:

i’m literally about to cry this is so cute

frektane:

i’m literally about to cry this is so cute

(via thebigblackwolfe)

Photo
lolsaladsex:

thebeginningofneverending:

blacksupervillain:

anarcho-queer:

U.S. Democrats plan to give Israel an addition $225 million for military spending. The same bill also cuts $1 billion of emergency funds meant to deal with the 50,000 undocumented child migrants held in crowded and unsanitary border facilities.
Israel already received $504 million for the joint U.S.-Israel Missle Defense Program for the Fiscal Year of 2014. That is not including the $3.1 Billion the Obama Administration spent on Foreign Military Financing (FMF) for Israel for the Fiscal Year 2014.

Fuck this

This makes me really, really mad

Bi partisan decision not just a democrat one

Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, chairman of the subcommittee, pushed through the increase which will include funding Israel’s R & D work on a new generation of rocket.
Dick Durbin is a Democrat. It matters who is pushing these things, not just the nature of the vote.
Not to mention, the Democratic Platform has, historically, been against Palestinian right of return, and it was only in the 2012 election that the reworked their stance to a more ambiguous language that is superficially in favor of Palestinian rights.
But then! In order to shore up the pro-Zionist vote, President Obama “directed the Democratic Party to amend its  platform to restore language declaring Jerusalem as the Israeli capital.
The change, approved in a voice vote Wednesday that had be taken three times because of a chorus of “noes” in the arena, reinstates the line, “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel” in a section that describes Mr. Obama’s policy toward Israel.”
Even if we say this is the result of bipartisan voting, the fact that those on the Left think that it was an acceptable deal to strip funding from support and care for children in order to fund an occupying military that is killing children… I think we have to question their role in that voting. Or, perhaps, their lack of a role. 

lolsaladsex:

thebeginningofneverending:

blacksupervillain:

anarcho-queer:

U.S. Democrats plan to give Israel an addition $225 million for military spending. The same bill also cuts $1 billion of emergency funds meant to deal with the 50,000 undocumented child migrants held in crowded and unsanitary border facilities.

Israel already received $504 million for the joint U.S.-Israel Missle Defense Program for the Fiscal Year of 2014. That is not including the $3.1 Billion the Obama Administration spent on Foreign Military Financing (FMF) for Israel for the Fiscal Year 2014.

Fuck this

This makes me really, really mad

Bi partisan decision not just a democrat one

Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, chairman of the subcommittee, pushed through the increase which will include funding Israel’s R & D work on a new generation of rocket.

Dick Durbin is a Democrat. It matters who is pushing these things, not just the nature of the vote.

Not to mention, the Democratic Platform has, historically, been against Palestinian right of return, and it was only in the 2012 election that the reworked their stance to a more ambiguous language that is superficially in favor of Palestinian rights.

But then! In order to shore up the pro-Zionist vote, President Obama “directed the Democratic Party to amend its  platform to restore language declaring Jerusalem as the Israeli capital.

The change, approved in a voice vote Wednesday that had be taken three times because of a chorus of “noes” in the arena, reinstates the line, “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel” in a section that describes Mr. Obama’s policy toward Israel.

Even if we say this is the result of bipartisan voting, the fact that those on the Left think that it was an acceptable deal to strip funding from support and care for children in order to fund an occupying military that is killing children… I think we have to question their role in that voting. Or, perhaps, their lack of a role. 

Text

Anonymous said: omg if baby oil dissolves condoms what the fuck does it do to babies???

the-kellin-under-the-vic:

This may be shocking, but babies and condoms are made of different material

Photo
pearl-nautilus:

Magnus Gjoen - Ceramic Beetle

pearl-nautilus:

Magnus Gjoen - Ceramic Beetle

(via 0belisks)

Quote
"I’m just doing my job."

— Said by every cop, boss, lawyer, politician, and judge to avoid culpability for  their own immoral actions. (via rustysmile)

(Source: anarchymeansiloveyou, via acceber74)

Photo
accras:

Nicole Beharie autograph signing at the FOX Fanfare - San Diego Comic-Con 2014 

actual disney princess Nicole Beharie

accras:

Nicole Beharie autograph signing at the FOX Fanfare - San Diego Comic-Con 2014 

actual disney princess Nicole Beharie

(via acceber74)