That's What We've Been Telling You
August 11th, 2008
News flash “half of overweight adults are heart-healthy” according to this new, totally shocking study:
You can look great in a swimsuit and still be a heart attack waiting to happen. And you can also be overweight and otherwise healthy. A new study suggests that a surprising number of overweight people — about half — have normal blood pressure and cholesterol levels, while an equally startling number of trim people suffer from some of the ills associated with obesity.
This is only “surprising” and “startling” if you make blanket judgments about people’s health based solely on their size. Hey, guess what? THAT IS NOT A GOOD IDEA.
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: Advocacy, Fat Positive, Fatism, Health, Tidbit
Email us
I’m constantly amazed at the contradictions in modern day research. One day, fat people are heart attacks waiting to happen; the next day, fat people are heart-healthy. I think science itself suffers from bipolar disorder.
So call me a crazy mathematician, but if half of fat people don’t have a problem, and half of thin people DO have that same problem, doesn’t that mean that fifty-percent of ALL people have said problem? And doesn’t it follow furthermore, since the problem is equally distributed, that FAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT?
What I loved is how they side stepped, from your weight being a barameter of “health” to your waistline is.
I didnt see this story as a step forward or back, just sideways.
What the heck is wrong with “science”? Why do they feel the need to create these myths of being able to LOOK at someone and know what is going on in their body?
I don’t think science is at fault here, I think it’s the people who take use it for there own agenders, not careing if they scramble the facts a little in the prosess.
I come from the camp that says that a surprising amount of people are overweight because of a medicle condition, not the other way round.
Did you people even look at the data?
The following had healthy measurements:
77% of “healthy weight”
51% of overweight
31.7% of obese
The fact that any particular individual in those groups might be healthy doesn’t change the fact that being overweight, and especially being obese, greatly increases your risk for having unhealthy measurements of cholesterol, blood sugar, etc.
Elizabeth: Half of the overweight people had heart risks, but only 1/4 of the people in the recommended weight range. That’s not equal. It punctures holes in the idea that if you are thin, you are ipso facto healthy, but it doesn’t mean the risk is equally distributed.
MrsDC: I’ve seen a trend where researchers are moving away from the faulty BMI to using waist-to-hip circumference instead as a way to predict health risks. There are still problems with this method, but I do think it’s more accurate than BMI.
“the fact that being overweight, and especially being obese, greatly increases your risk for having unhealthy measurements of cholesterol, blood sugar, etc.”
It may increase your risk, but remember that all fat people do not develop diabetes and high cholesterol. Also remember that all fat people do not continually shove cheeseburgers, donuts, and sodas down their throats 24/7. Thinner people who eat these items also have a risk as well. You can’t also forget genetics plays a huge part in health conditions as well.
You cannot automatically assume the bigger your body, the more diseases and health problems you’ll develop.
I read this article this morning in my local paper. It’s great until about halfway through, when it is ruined by hypocrisy and body fascism:
‘Study co-author Judith Wylie-Rosett emphasized that the study shouldn’t send the message “that we don’t need to worry about weight.” That’s because half of overweight people do face elevated risks for heart disease, explained Wylie-Rosett, a nutrition researcher at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York.
‘But, for those without elevated risks, losing weight “might be important only from a cosmetic perspective,” she said.’
Yes, weight loss for cosmetic reasons is *important,* and it’s especially *important* to include this sentiment in an article about HEALTH. If anyone ever questioned whether body fascism is about health or not, I think we have our answer here.
Furthermore, in an article that basically proves that THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS A HEALTHY WEIGHT, this same researcher refers to “people of healthy weight.” And the my head exploded.
Two steps forward, one step back, I guess…
@ Elizabeth – that’s what I had thought, too. Crazymath!
@ Enomis – “a nutrition researcher” explained how half of overweight people face risks for heart disease, huh? Now, that’s interesting, given that this nutrition researcher’s job is to get people to follow some kind of externally determined “nutrition” plan, likely involving all kinds of low-calorie choices, and possibly involving corporate sponsorship. Hear, hear to what you said – AND for quoting info that points out that this is not someone who knows anything about people’s heart health. (Nutrition /= cardiology, as much as the trolls might want it to!)
It’s irrelevant how many people in any catagory have heart disease factors. There are some basic assumptions wrong with the article:
1. They are conflating a small set of measurements with disease outcomes, thanks to Sandy at JFS, I’m now aware that these surrogate endpoints don’t mean all that much. Tell me how many of the people in each group die at what age of heart problems, then you have some important data. Remember that whole foofoorah recently where taking the cholesterol-lowering drug didn’t do anything for the amount of actual deaths?
2. As Gabrielle pointed out, it could well be there’s a disease causing both the heart problems and the weight gain. I agree with her, I think a lot of people gain weight due to an underlying disease.
3. Given that more fat people have been on diets than thin people, did they even study whether these health measurements were correlated with dieting behavior, past or present? Maybe eating less than a certain number of calories per day changes the blood pressure/cholesterol/triglycerides production.
4. There’s an expectation that people will lose weight and be healthy, yet there’s no effective way for most fat people to lose weight long term. So even if fat is a marker for disease, it’s not something that’s reasonable to ask people to change.
5. We already know two things, stress is related to blood pressure; and fat people are discriminated against. It may well be that fat people have a greater incidence of high blood pressure due to discrimination, and not their weight. Perhaps people with less hourglassy figures also experience this discrimination.
This was my favorite line:
“But, for those without elevated risks, losing weight “might be important only from a cosmetic perspective,” she said.”
I skimmed through the article and noticed the same thing Danielle noticed. The data clearly shows that the more overweight someone is, there is a higher probability that their test results will not be good. This does not mean that thin people can’t have high cholesterol, or that all fat people are unhealthy… but it does show that the fatter you are, the more likely it is you will develop this kind of disease.
Which doesn’t mean anyone should discriminate against fat people or that health is a moral issue, but I kind of agree with the scientists’ concerns about obesity…
You can look great in a swimsuit and still be a heart attack waiting to happen. And you can also be overweight and otherwise healthy.
Or, you can look great in a swimsuit AND be overweight. :)
I find it funny that no one seems to notice the direct parallel between a lot of these comments and people who say smoking doesn’t cause lung cancer. We have a study here that shows that being overweight/obese increases your chance of having health problems (of course done on a statistically significant number of people, so it’s not a coincidence). Saying “well being obese is okay because there are unhealthy skinny people and healthy obese people!” is analogous to saying “smoking is okay because there are non-smokers with lung cancer and smokers without lung cancer!”
It’s fine if someone wants to be obese, just like it’s fine if someone wants to smoke. But to deny the statistically proven health risk that comes about as a result of the activity isn’t right.
It’s fine if someone wants to be obese, just like it’s fine if someone wants to smoke
Oh, no, not this again.
See, I didn’t decide to be fat, but my roommate did decide to take up smoking. There’s a difference.
I’m fat because I come from a long line of thick people – I could show you a picture from a recent family reunion, and you would see that even the slimmest of us tend towards the bulky side (not just fat, but muscle, too). I’m fat. I’m also healthy. It’s part genetics and part pure cussedness — I have incredibly low blood pressure and low cholesterol, my “normal sized” sister-in-law has high blood pressure.
Anecdotes aren’t data, I understand, but please also remember that correllation isn’t causation. Are the statistics showing that obesity causes heart problems, or is it showing that heart problems are caused by a lifestyle that may also cause certain people to gain weight? Also, if thin people are also not exempt from heart problems, should doctors only focus on fat people? And should my doctor’s man concern be “OMG, you’re fat and you might have heart disease?” Given that my family history shows more instances of cancer than heart disease*, I’m inclined to say — no. But many doctors focus on this with me because of my waistline — and the tests prove I’m still heart healthy, they say, “well, you should still consider losing weight, just in case.”
WTF.
Rio did a good series on fat as a symptom that says this sort of stuff better:
http://rioiriri.blogspot.com/2008/06/fat-is-symptom-not-disease-part-five.html
Someone wants to be obese, indeed. What the fuck.
*In fact, the only instance of heart disease is my father, who had a congenital birth defect in his heart that wasn’t caught and fixed when he was born in the 1950s and that became an issue when he hit 45. Even his doctor said it had nothing to do with his weight. This instance is “pure cussedness” coming into play.
I didnt see this story as a step forward or back, just sideways.
Exactly what I thought, too.
What most people don’t know is that even if more “overweight” test subjects got ill, this does NOT automatically increase the individual risk for every single person in that category. It can be hard to wrap your head around the concept at first, but that’s just how it is. No one knows WHY they got ill – was it due to fatness, to increased stress from discrimination, to certain habits, to genetic predisposition? What came first – fatness, illness or an unknown factor which caused both?
I’m a big fan of the “fat as a symptom” series as well.
Tigi,
The fact that you are prone to obesity because of genetics does not mean that *most* fat people are fat because of genetics. (I’d be willing to guess that most fat people are fat because they eat more than what their body requires to keep functioning). So for some people, being fat *is* a choice.
Of course, you’re right, fat doesn’t necessarily cause heart disease (for example), because if you got fat from eating lettuce all day long I doubt there would be much cholesterol in your body… But the statistics in that article are very clear: the fatter someone is, the more likely that they have abnormal test results.
Tigi,
My guess, while it isn’t scientific, is that you and I have NO IDEA if most fat people got that way by overeating.
For you to assume that we could know that is, well, shitty.
I think most folks who comment here understand that there are health risks associated with obesity. Risk doesn’t guarantee that those conditions will emerge in every obese person.
Our bodies are very complex. To reduce health to BMI or the circumference of your waist is probably too simplistic.
So for some people, being fat *is* a choice.
Mmmmm… no. I disagree. We could get into the argument forever about this, but there are a lot of factors that you don’t consider — for instance, what kind of food is available to a person in their community, what can they afford — healthy choices all the time, or cheaper, more filling, higher-calorie stuff? Can one afford a gym membership, do they have safe, outdoor places to do exercise? Does the person have a job, or two jobs, that keeps them busy for a huge portion of the day and a home-life that keeps them busy for the rest of the day, meaning they don’t always have time to exercise or eat carefully? Have they dieted a bunch and fucked up their metabolism — something most commenters have mentioned so far, as I re-peruse the thread. Do they have disorderd eating? It is more complicated that “choosing” to eat more than they take in, or “choosing” to eat donuts all day instead of lettuce.
And it’s not even the point! The point is that doctors are focusing on my waistline to make judgments about my health, and that’s totally messed up. Besides that, we’re against the idea that being fat is the *cause*of health problems. A correllation, a symptom, or a plain coincidence, sure. Just not the cause. That’s what most of us are complaining about — that we’re perfectly healthy people who get lectures from doctors about our fat asses that will clearly kill us when, you know, we have other health matters we want to address. Thanks, gynocologist, for telling me I should “think about losing 20lbs,” but I’m really just here for my pap smear. Also, my GP already gave me a clean bill of health, pal, so could you just do your thing so can go look for a new gyno?
There are more horror stories at First, Do No Harm:
http://fathealth.wordpress.com/
I’m just saying, don’t be surprised if people at an FA blog don’t really want to hear that our fatness will kill us… because we hear it every day. Constantly.
… sorry, owners of this blog, I will shut up now. :-)
Hi Cindy —
Yep, that’s pretty much what i think. I totally agree. I think you mixed me up with someone else — i was responding to people who came in and said that to me.
Ok, Tigi, I’m sorry, I really didn’t mean to be annoying. And I think Cindy was replying to me and I do agree with her… I can’t and shouldn’t guess how people got fat and it’s none of my business anyway.
Sorry!
Tigi, I meant to type Beta’s name.
And I wasn’t trying to shut you down, Beta. I just don’t know that it’s possible to know, without reservation, how people’s bodies achieved the weight they happen to be.
Beta, don’t worry. It’s just something I read a lot and it frustrates me after a while. I’m with Cindy, I don’t want to shut down conversation, but a lot of times it just goes in the same circle over and over again. I do think that the correllation is important, though — that a lot of people who fall into the obese category may also not have access to certain kinds of good nutrition and health care that would prevent health problems.
I love how studies like this come out all the time, but every single time it’s reported like some kind of surprise. How about just “more evidence to support theories that have been being supported for years.” No. Shock! teh fattyz can! be! healthy!