being skinny is more unhealthy than being fat?

glovepuppet

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/10/yet_another_obesity_study/

Yet another study has shown that the so-called "obesity" epidemic sweeping the wealthy nations of the world has been massively over-hyped, as new results show that is is far more dangerous to be assessed as "underweight" than it is to be assessed even as "severely obese" - let alone merely "obese" or "overweight".

"There is currently a widespread belief that any degree of overweight or obesity increases the risk of death, however our findings suggest this may not be the case," says health prof Anthony Jerant, lead author of the study. "In the six-year timeframe of our evaluation, we found that only severe obesity was associated with an increased risk of death."

Most statistics in this field are still based on the now widely discredited Body Mass Index (BMI) system, under which people are assessed as "underweight", "normal", "overweight", "obese" or "severely obese". BMI, devised in the early 19th century by an obscure Belgian sociologist without medical qualifications, copes poorly with increases in height as it assumes the human body will scale up in mass in proportion to the square of height – which doesn't allow for the fact that bodies are three dimensional – and further fails to allow for the greater cross-sectional area needed in supporting structures to carry increasing weights.

Jerant and his colleagues, surveying nearly 51,000 Americans of all ages over a period of six years, found that "underweight" BMI was far and away the most dangerous category to be placed in. During the study period, the "underweight" subjects showed a risk of death no less than twice as high as the "normal" participants.

It was considerably safer to be "severely obese": the people in this category were just 1.26 times as likely to die as "normals". This was because more of them suffered from hypertension and diabetes, and once people without these two conditions were subtracted, the many non-diabetic, non-hypertense "severely obese" fatties were no more likely to die than "normal" people. People who were merely "obese" or "overweight" didn't suffer from diabetes or hypertension any more than "normal" people, and ran no increased risks.

"We hope our findings will trigger studies that re-examine the relationship of being overweight or obese with long-term mortality," comments Jerant.

and, it seems, being big might not be as bad as we're led to believe.

stfuriada

Being unhealthy is unhealthy. Doesn't matter which side of the spectrum you fall on.

devil_in_a_blue_dress

Being unhealthy is unhealthy. Doesn't matter which side of the spectrum you fall on.

THIS.

END THREAD.

Hellbent_Heidi

Great..another excuse for people to use for justifying their unhealthy lifestyles! :grumble:

glovepuppet

Being unhealthy is unhealthy. Doesn't matter which side of the spectrum you fall on.

THIS.

END THREAD.

or... how about the thread doesn't end and the conversation is left for people who actually have an interest in such things?

Brunner26_2

I've heard this before. It only says they're more likely to die. It doesn't say from what. The reason doesn't have to be health related. One possible explanation is the activity level of active, healthy weight people ("normals" as the article calls them).You're more likely to die at any given moment if you're outside running or climbing rock wall than if you're sitting on your couch.

chivalryder

It's a heck of a lot easier to be obese than it is to be anorexic! How many people have you met are actually under the lowest recommended BMI?

Keefypoos

where did they find underweight people in America?

skylark94

So underweight people are less healthy than overweight people. With possibility of the effects of malnourishment, I'm not at all surprised.

Being overweight may be better than being underweight, but that certainly doesn't mean overweight is okay.

Lleldiranne

What about quality of life, though? Panting and wheezing, heart problems, other organ issues, increased risk of diabetes (which can severely affect quality of life), increase blood pressure and/or cholesterol and meds to deal with them, the list goes on and on …

Medicine has adapted to deal with all the associated problems of being overweight, which helps to "reduce the risk of dying." It hasn't done much to help those who are underweight, except classify them as having an ED and treating it as such. Yep, there are health risks on both sides.

Last thought, I didn't see how far "underweight" the study looked at - a few pounds, 10 pounds, a certain %, what?
And, since underweight is usually (not always, but often) caused by some other health concern, did they separate the causes? Was it being underweight, or was it whatever caused the underweight?

k7n2w3

Great..another excuse for people to use for justifying their unhealthy lifestyles! :grumble:

Why would you say that?? it's like how I like to say "why run, i could be injured and besides people die during marathons, I should just eat cheetos on my couch and drink my barrel of soda since exercise is harmful".
hehe j/k obviously I feel completely the same when i read this. and like the other person said "unhealthy is unhealthy no matter what spectrum you are on".

Acg67

ironanimal

Being underweight you're more likely to suffer from malnutrition in one or more areas, but being fat places extra stress on your body through sheer exertion and having to deal with extra stuff it can't process or use effectively. Pick your poison.

Or, try to be fit and healthy.

adam1885282

"Safer" does not equal "safe." From study, very underweight equals 2 times chance chance to die, while very overweight equals only 1.26 times chance to die.

And no, it is not safe to be extremely over weight or extremely underweight.

glovepuppet

It's a heck of a lot easier to be obese than it is to be anorexic! How many people have you met are actually under the lowest recommended BMI?

i was for years. bmi 15-16. being anorexic was, for me, utterly effortless.
earing every day, cooking, chewing, swallowing is far more effort.

416runner

Ugh - I hate this kind of journalism. As though being overweight and underweight are the only two options. Whatever happened to the middle?

Hellbent_Heidi

Or, try to be fit and healthy.

WELL SAID!!

Do people need to choose between "skinny" or "obese"? I think articles like this send out a message that its OK to be overweight, instead of focusing on the importance of finding some kind of happy medium, where you're both fit and healthy, but not leaning towards either extreme....

IronPlayground

This study has too many flaws to be considered valid. First off, BMI is a poor factor to use. You could take the majority of NFL players and they would be considered obese to severely obese by BMI standards. So, if you then take out the people with medical issues, who are you really using to get the data?

IMO, this study was a waste of time and proves nothing.

_Wits_

It's a heck of a lot easier to be obese than it is to be anorexic! How many people have you met are actually under the lowest recommended BMI?

::slams head on wall::

StormyGal8

In ages gone by, we were, as a species "naturally thin". We had to work for our food, hunting, fishing, chopping and hauling firewood, farming and all the chores that go with it....during periods of prosperity, we gained a little weight, and during periods of strife, we thinned out (and I am talking caveman-victorian era).
Then came the ages of prepackaged, fat laden, laziness-in-a-can/box/bag, and we grew fat and sedentary.

I can, by NO stretch of the imagination, picture a situation, in THIS world, where being overweight would be healthier than being underweight. 200 years ago, for sure...but in this society? Not by a long shot.

I think it's just an excuse for people not to feel so bad about themselves.

Acg67

Body Mass Index, Diabetes, Hypertension, and Short-Term Mortality: A Population-Based Observational Study, 2000–2006

http://www.jabfm.org/content/25/4/422.full