The Obesity Myth.?!?
December 5, 2013 6:12 AM Subscribe
Being healthy and obese is a myth, researchers say People who are obese and have normal blood pressure, cholesterol and blood-sugar readings will still be unhealthy and die sooner compared with people who have a normal body weight, according to researchers.
"The researchers wanted to consider whether [obese] people were actually at any more risk of death or heart problems. Their meta-analysis used data on more than 60,000 people across three weight categories – normal, overweight and obese – in eight studies carried out over the last decade. While metabolically healthy obese people showed a similar risk of problems compared to those with normal weight, this wasn't the case when the researchers looked only at studies that had ten years of follow up. Study participants in all weight categories with unhealthy metabolisms showed an increased risk of mortality and cardiovascular problems."
Research article is here.
Editorial by the researchers.
This study conflicts with earlier work on the relationship between health and obesity.
"The researchers wanted to consider whether [obese] people were actually at any more risk of death or heart problems. Their meta-analysis used data on more than 60,000 people across three weight categories – normal, overweight and obese – in eight studies carried out over the last decade. While metabolically healthy obese people showed a similar risk of problems compared to those with normal weight, this wasn't the case when the researchers looked only at studies that had ten years of follow up. Study participants in all weight categories with unhealthy metabolisms showed an increased risk of mortality and cardiovascular problems."
Research article is here.
Editorial by the researchers.
This study conflicts with earlier work on the relationship between health and obesity.
This post was deleted for the following reason: This is a super short article, and the other pertinent links are paywalled; maybe try to get more together on this and post again? -- taz
From our 'well duh' department.
posted by GallonOfAlan at 6:25 AM on December 5, 2013
posted by GallonOfAlan at 6:25 AM on December 5, 2013
I thought we already knew this? Cardiovascular issues, lymph issues, and I believe immune issues were all tied into excess adipose tissue, though the root cause of the immune issues was thought to be fatty acid metabolism by-products rather than the extra mass itself if I'm remembering those early, early days of general health and biology classes correctly.
posted by Slackermagee at 6:26 AM on December 5, 2013
posted by Slackermagee at 6:26 AM on December 5, 2013
Why hellooooo there ambiguous statistical language! It's been, what, a week since you stopped by with your last article on obesity?
How you doing?
posted by Theta States at 6:28 AM on December 5, 2013 [1 favorite]
How you doing?
posted by Theta States at 6:28 AM on December 5, 2013 [1 favorite]
Why are researchers using BMI? Isn't that stat supposed to be wildly inaccurate? Or have I been misinformed?
BMI is useful as a population metric, not as an individual one. Just about any measurement has flaws, especially when it has defined categories. Notably, a lot of large, strong, fit, healthy people can be categorized as overweight or obese based on their BMI, when it's pretty clear that they're not.
That said, I'm not sure why researchers are still using it - but it might be because there's not a suitable replacement. Especially for the purposes of comparing to other research.
posted by entropone at 6:28 AM on December 5, 2013
BMI is useful as a population metric, not as an individual one. Just about any measurement has flaws, especially when it has defined categories. Notably, a lot of large, strong, fit, healthy people can be categorized as overweight or obese based on their BMI, when it's pretty clear that they're not.
That said, I'm not sure why researchers are still using it - but it might be because there's not a suitable replacement. Especially for the purposes of comparing to other research.
posted by entropone at 6:28 AM on December 5, 2013
Based on the risk ratios reported in the abstract, a better summary would be "obese people with metabolic markers in the normal range have a slightly higher mortality and risk of cardiovascular events than lower-weight people with normal metabolic markers, but they have a massively lower mortality and cardiovascular risk than people of any weight with bad metabolic markers." In other words, metabolic health seems to be much more determinative of mortality than BMI is.
posted by escabeche at 6:30 AM on December 5, 2013
posted by escabeche at 6:30 AM on December 5, 2013
(But I just read the abstract, not the study itself.)
posted by escabeche at 6:30 AM on December 5, 2013
posted by escabeche at 6:30 AM on December 5, 2013
As explained to me by my doctor, BMI is only inaccurate if you deviate from the statistical norm. Say, if you're 6'4" like me (96% of people are shorter than me) and/or extremely athletic.
For the overwhelming bulk of the population (i.e. if you're a dude who is 5'11"), BMI works just fine.
Obese at 220 lbs ? Still, I feel better having come down to 190.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 6:31 AM on December 5, 2013
For the overwhelming bulk of the population (i.e. if you're a dude who is 5'11"), BMI works just fine.
Obese at 220 lbs ? Still, I feel better having come down to 190.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 6:31 AM on December 5, 2013
« Older Shoot that poison arrow | Hall Pass: An Oral History of Kids In The Hall Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by magstheaxe at 6:15 AM on December 5, 2013 [1 favorite]