ext_28081 ([identity profile] hry2007.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] beandelphiki 2007-07-26 06:16 pm (UTC)

THERE IS A MOUNTAIN OF SAND IN MY VAG ABOUT THIS TOPIC AND I'M GOING TO SHARE IT WITH YOU NOW

On the one hand, the study has a point, it's more common to be overweight and this is making it more socially acceptable. On the other hand, it's basically suggesting discrimination as a means of addressing a public health issue. Researchers are supposed to describe situations. If they have a need to recommend solutions, it should be a variety of possible answers, not the one or two biased answers, let alone that are known to cause emotional damage.

I'm getting really burnt out on the term overweight as defined by the BMI being used to berate EVERYONE who isn't a size 6. Doctors and nutritionists I've talked to have said, and I'm pretty sure I've read the same online, that the overweight range is a fairly recent addition to the BMI. It was put in not because being overweight itself is unhealthy, but because overweight people tend to gain weight over time and become obese, which is unhealthy. It's basically a warning to get in shape, not a problem in it's own right. Furthermore, it ignores more recent research that factors in bone structure. For instance, hourglass-shaped women have healthier hearts, a waist-to-hip ratio greater than 80% is considered unhealthy, and being chesty isn't harmful unless you have back issues because of it. It's extra fat on the abdomen that's the biggest factor, IIRC women should have waist <35 inches, and men <38. Also, those in the overweight category are better able to fight off infection, particularity seniors, and women with extra meat on their bones are much less likely to get osteoporosis.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting