![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
danaerisA number of people have pointed out to me in the past that most of these studies which say that obese people are all going to die horrible deaths don't correct for physical fitness. They completely ignore the possibility that an obese person could be in better physical shape than a thin person, in some cases.
OK, I think. So, there should be some studies done which control properly for this. But, until those are done, this proves nothing... nor does the prevailing wisdom.
Well, I just did a quick search to find information that DIRECTLY links obesity, or lack of physical fitness, or both, to morbidity, rather than correlating without controlling.
I've found one thing which is without question a risk, but it is a risk that doesn't apply to everyone:
In short? Women with hormonal imbalances will be more likely to get endometrial cancer if they are overweight, and the risk may increase in proportion with the level of extra adipose tissue (iirc, not ALL fat is adipose tissue).
On the other hand, I found several links supporting the idea that for the most part, it appears that it is physical fitness, and not the obesity itself, that leads to morbidity, or at least, that obesity is not entirely to blame, and the so-called risks of obesity can be ameliorated at least somewhat by staying physically fit.
A Skeptics Society review of a book arguing this very point — that it is physical fitness, and not obesity, that we should be worrying about. The review is relatively favourable, saying that for the most part, the book supports its argument well. The article also cites studies. That gets me hot.
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic02-24-05.html
WARNINGS:
This post is a skeptics-only zone. Your opinion is not interesting; only the supportable data you can find matters. If you have an opinion, go get on your own soapbox somewhere else!
This is also not something I'm interested in filtering. I understand that it is a trigger-y topic, but I think it is crucial that we understand, or strive to understand, what is actually essential to our health. I'm a journalist, and a young and idealistic one. Sometimes, when I do research into these things, it is with the hope that my knowledge will help people out. That means you have to actually read it. Newspapers aren't filtered for other people's feelings, and sometimes, neither will my journal be.
OK, I think. So, there should be some studies done which control properly for this. But, until those are done, this proves nothing... nor does the prevailing wisdom.
Well, I just did a quick search to find information that DIRECTLY links obesity, or lack of physical fitness, or both, to morbidity, rather than correlating without controlling.
I've found one thing which is without question a risk, but it is a risk that doesn't apply to everyone:
In the early phase of the menstrual cycle, estradiol levels in women with PCOS are equal to those of normal women; however, mid-cycle elevations of estrogen and progesterone that normally occur after ovulation are absent. Because of the lack of cyclical progesterone secretion, the action of estradiol on both the hypothalamic-pituitary axis and the endometrium is unopposed. Both progesterone deficiency and acyclic estrogen production contribute to increased secretion of LH. The effects of unopposed estrogen on the endometrium may cause it to become hyperplastic, which may cause intermittent and heavy uterine bleeding and increase the long-term risk of endometrial cancer. These effects may be compounded, especially in obese patients, by increased levels of estrone converted from androstenedione in adipose tissue.
- http://www.emedicine.com/ped/topic2155.htm
In short? Women with hormonal imbalances will be more likely to get endometrial cancer if they are overweight, and the risk may increase in proportion with the level of extra adipose tissue (iirc, not ALL fat is adipose tissue).
On the other hand, I found several links supporting the idea that for the most part, it appears that it is physical fitness, and not the obesity itself, that leads to morbidity, or at least, that obesity is not entirely to blame, and the so-called risks of obesity can be ameliorated at least somewhat by staying physically fit.
On the positive side, recent evidence suggests that physical activity confers health benefits that are largely or entirely independent of changes in body composition. These findings suggest that overweight and obese individuals can obtain the same benefits of physical activity as lean individuals. While the overall health benefits of physical activity have become well accepted, the general assumption (even among many within the scientific community) has been that the benefits are contingent or dependent on corresponding changes in body composition. While physical activity can lead to changes in body composition, the amount of change depends on an individual's genetics, individual variability in metabolism and possibly other lifestyle behaviors. The cellular and metabolic adaptations occurring as a result of physical activity appear to be independent of these changes. Therefore, an overweight or obese person can have good cardiovascular health as long as he/she remains active and possesses a reasonable level of fitness. This is clearly an important message that should be conveyed to individuals who have struggled with weight control all their lives.
- http://www.fitness.gov/digest_dec2000.htm
A Skeptics Society review of a book arguing this very point — that it is physical fitness, and not obesity, that we should be worrying about. The review is relatively favourable, saying that for the most part, the book supports its argument well. The article also cites studies. That gets me hot.
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic02-24-05.html
WARNINGS:
This post is a skeptics-only zone. Your opinion is not interesting; only the supportable data you can find matters. If you have an opinion, go get on your own soapbox somewhere else!
This is also not something I'm interested in filtering. I understand that it is a trigger-y topic, but I think it is crucial that we understand, or strive to understand, what is actually essential to our health. I'm a journalist, and a young and idealistic one. Sometimes, when I do research into these things, it is with the hope that my knowledge will help people out. That means you have to actually read it. Newspapers aren't filtered for other people's feelings, and sometimes, neither will my journal be.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-25 09:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-25 09:38 pm (UTC)I have yet to find a study that controlled for fitness and found that obesity alone caused the risk factors involved. I haven't searched very far. And I confess that my initial reaction to this was yours: I find it hard to believe that obesity is NOT itself a risk factor. I find it hard to believe that someone who is physically fit could NOT be obese. But, what I can and cannot believe is irrelevant, in a skeptical inquiry.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-25 09:49 pm (UTC)Or are you looking for citations that there is any correlation at all between fitness and obesity?
no subject
Date: 2005-08-27 02:10 pm (UTC)As far as what I want, I'd rather you not post statements about the likelihood of something without support in the form of a citation. In fact there HAVE been some studies which controlled for fitness. There are some studies ongoing which are controlling for fitness. It's a work in progress. I don't see why you think it can't be controlled for.
I'm also wondering if you even read the links and quotes I posted before you posted your accidentally anonymous comment, because it didn't sound like it.
Sorry if this comment sounds hostile; I just got up and don't have enough brain cells to make it sound nice yet questioning.