Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Obesity Paradox: Health benefits to being overweight?

Options
djcolloid
djcolloid Posts: 13 Member
edited April 2016 in Debate Club
Recently, several news sites (Quartz, Times, etc.) have reported on this study that pointed out overweight people have a longer life expectancy than people with normal BMI, with the account of elevated heart disease/diabetes risk caused by excess fat.

This 'obesity paradox' has been reported before, but with the whole fat acceptance movement, discussion and debate have become more frequent. Is this change in stance detrimental to fighting the obesity epidemic?
«1

Replies

  • Fuzzipeg
    Fuzzipeg Posts: 2,298 Member
    Options
    I have read the basis of the tables used for hight/weight recommendations are based on information taken from the insurance industry possibly as far back as the 1930's/40's. There was some talk of these figures being tilted towards an under weight status and probably not representing a "good weight". The difference may only be 7 lb or so which could account for why some people look more importantly feel too thin at a prescriptive weight. 7 lb would be enough to shift the balance towards a slightly higher weight.

    There may be benefits of carrying an extra 7 lb but the probable consequences of carrying a few extra stones or more are inescapable. We still need greater understanding of what makes our bodies tick so people with "disrupted" systems can achieve systemic/metabolic support rather than vilification.
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Options
    IIRC there was some evidence to show that being mildly overweight (not obese) according to traditional BMI calculations (so a figure of around 26) was protective against mortality depending on lifestyle factors (so the whole fat but fit thing.)

    There is an argument to say that current BMI calculations should be revised anyway and the revisions I have seen would place the people now deemed to be mildly overweight into normal weight categories.

    I don't think such information is detrimental to fighting the obesity epidemic as it doesn't pertain to obese people in the first place but rather how it is spun by certain movements or in news reporting.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    stealthq wrote: »
    The only study I've seen with those results failed to account for individuals who were normal or underweight as a result of being ill. People who'd lost weight on long-term chemo, that sort of thing. It skewed the mortality. After this was pointed out, either that group or another (can't remember) corrected the data and it showed no benefit to being overweight vs normal weight. There was a detriment to being underweight or obese.

    That's what I remember reading as the outcome also.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    Firstly, there is a difference in overweight and obese. It's pretty easy to be a few lbs overweight and remain healthy if you exercise regularly.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Firstly, there is a difference in overweight and obese. It's pretty easy to be a few lbs overweight and remain healthy if you exercise regularly.

    Of course. There is a very big range of healthy. It's individual.
  • Scamd83
    Scamd83 Posts: 808 Member
    Options
    Is this anything to do with the whole early man eating as much as they could get hold of during times of food being plentiful to compensate for famines and thus being able to survive on their higher body fat levels thing?
  • KorvapuustiPossu
    KorvapuustiPossu Posts: 434 Member
    Options
    Pinkylee77 wrote: »
    A factor that people working in the medical field has seen is a little extra weight provides the reserves when the older person develops a serious illness such as pneumonia or major infection and is hospitalized. The very thin older person does not have the reserves to sustain them through an illness.

    I absolutely agree with this one. Have seen it happen many times.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    Options
    KorvapuustiPossu wrote: »
    Pinkylee77 wrote: »
    A factor that people working in the medical field has seen is a little extra weight provides the reserves when the older person develops a serious illness such as pneumonia or major infection and is hospitalized. The very thin older person does not have the reserves to sustain them through an illness.

    I absolutely agree with this one. Have seen it happen many times.

    Yes, but that's the difference between underweight and normal weight. When an older person is above normal weight, and possibly even high normal they often start to have problems with mobility. When they move less, that is when there's a greater chance to develop health issues in the first place.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    stealthq wrote: »
    KorvapuustiPossu wrote: »
    Pinkylee77 wrote: »
    A factor that people working in the medical field has seen is a little extra weight provides the reserves when the older person develops a serious illness such as pneumonia or major infection and is hospitalized. The very thin older person does not have the reserves to sustain them through an illness.

    I absolutely agree with this one. Have seen it happen many times.

    Yes, but that's the difference between underweight and normal weight. When an older person is above normal weight, and possibly even high normal they often start to have problems with mobility. When they move less, that is when there's a greater chance to develop health issues in the first place.

    Maintaining activity is so important.
  • Pinkylee77
    Pinkylee77 Posts: 432 Member
    Options
    stealthq wrote: »
    KorvapuustiPossu wrote: »
    Pinkylee77 wrote: »
    A factor that people working in the medical field has seen is a little extra weight provides the reserves when the older person develops a serious illness such as pneumonia or major infection and is hospitalized. The very thin older person does not have the reserves to sustain them through an illness.

    I absolutely agree with this one. Have seen it happen many times.

    Yes, but that's the difference between underweight and normal weight. When an older person is above normal weight, and possibly even high normal they often start to have problems with mobility. When they move less, that is when there's a greater chance to develop health issues in the first place.

    Even normal weight patients often don't have reserves to deal with a sustained illness. We are not talking about obese who can't move. All too often even normal weight elderly have mobility issues. But yes staying active is important.
  • moe0303
    moe0303 Posts: 934 Member
    Options
    Generally speaking,
    bryanliang7 wrote: »
    Recently, several news sites (Quartz, Times, etc.) have reported on this study that pointed out overweight people have a longer life expectancy than people with normal BMI, with the account of elevated heart disease/diabetes risk caused by excess fat.

    This 'obesity paradox' has been reported before, but with the whole fat acceptance movement, discussion and debate have become more frequent. Is this change in stance detrimental to fighting the obesity epidemic?

    I doubt it. I think the people that use this type of info to justify obesity are the ones least likely to change based solely on information from studies.

    PS

    BMI is stupid for assessing individuals.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    Options
    Pinkylee77 wrote: »
    stealthq wrote: »
    KorvapuustiPossu wrote: »
    Pinkylee77 wrote: »
    A factor that people working in the medical field has seen is a little extra weight provides the reserves when the older person develops a serious illness such as pneumonia or major infection and is hospitalized. The very thin older person does not have the reserves to sustain them through an illness.

    I absolutely agree with this one. Have seen it happen many times.

    Yes, but that's the difference between underweight and normal weight. When an older person is above normal weight, and possibly even high normal they often start to have problems with mobility. When they move less, that is when there's a greater chance to develop health issues in the first place.

    Even normal weight patients often don't have reserves to deal with a sustained illness. We are not talking about obese who can't move. All too often even normal weight elderly have mobility issues. But yes staying active is important.

    Which are often improved by staying at a lower, but still healthy, weight.

    Sustained illness once you get to a certain age is going to be a major issue whether or not you have reserves to deal with it. I do agree that if two people were equally fit and healthy to start, then the slightly overweight one might have a better chance.
  • blues4miles
    blues4miles Posts: 1,481 Member
    Options
    rrowdiness wrote: »
    Have read a couple of articles on this.

    The big gaps:
    - no adjustment for lifestyle factors such as smoking (where the smoking population has a lower average BMI than the remainder of the population, combined with a higher mortality rate)

    I can't find the article now, but this was what I read as well. The old study that claimed to show this did not separate out underweight and healthy weight non-smokers. So people who are slightly overweight but don't smoke are healthier than healthy weight and underweight smokers. But once you remove the smokers, being overweight is not healthier.

    Here's an up to date (sort of) study on disproving this myth:
    http://content.onlinejacc.org/article.aspx?articleid=1864462&_ga=1.87697435.2087464074.1460756204#tab1
    Compared with metabolically-healthy normal-weight people, metabolically-healthy obese people were at significantly greater risk for death and cardiovascular events, which affirms the notion that obesity portends an adverse long-term prognosis irrespective of the presence or absence of concomitant metabolic abnormalities.
    Obesity adversely affects almost all physiological homeostatic mechanisms, and its presence is associated with both cardiac and many noncardiometabolic disorders, including malignancy, infection, infertility, joint disease, depression, and cognitive decline.
    Although the analysis by Chang et al. (6) failed to uncover a significantly greater burden of subclinical atherosclerotic disease in the overweight compared with normal-weight people, the meta-analysis by Kramer et al. (7) clearly demonstrated a significant association between being overweight and cardiovascular events. Given that overweight people are at heightened risk for evolving into an obese state, interventions that target the overweight population are equally critical.
  • Pinkylee77
    Pinkylee77 Posts: 432 Member
    Options
    Remember there is a difference in obesity and over weight
  • djcolloid
    djcolloid Posts: 13 Member
    Options
    Pinkylee77 wrote: »
    Remember there is a difference in obesity and over weight

    I know there's a difference between obesity and overweight, but the used term for this phenomenon is called the "obesity paradox". Sorry it's not the "overweight paradox", I didn't come up with it.

Categories