Fat epidemic linked to chemicals run amok

MSNBC, the More S**t (for brains) Network and the IMHO cons at Rodale (e.g., see here, here, here and here) team up for more stupidity. The fat epidemic is linked to MSM run amok since people believe their junk.

It's not just about calories in versus calories out.

If that were all it took to lose weight — eating a little less and exercising a little more — then weight loss would be as simple as grade-school math: Subtract Y from Z and end up with X.

It is absolutely about Calories in vs. Calories out.

If you are inclined to accept the MSNBC/Rodale crap, then ask them point blank what form of life will not lose weight if it consumes fewer Calories than it burns. (Please post their response if you get one.)

So what is the culprit that is negating the Laws of Thermodynamics that hold everywhere in the known universe, except at MSNBC (in this case) and Rodale?

A third factor may be in play: a class of natural and synthetic chemicals known as endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), or as researchers have begun to call them, obesogens.

Somehow these things have figured out a way to upset the laws of nature.

The goal should be to figure out a way to get them into the gas tank of a motor vehicle so it will drive forever on a drop of petrol.

Why stop with the human body when there are many other things that can benefit from distorting universal physical laws?

Why traditional diets don't work

Decades ago, before big, soft guts were the norm in the United States, we referred to overweight people as having "glandular problems." Their weight was not their fault, doctors explained; their bodies just didn't have the ability to fight off weight gain like most people's bodies did.

We don't use that polite phrase any longer. What changed? Now that about two-thirds of American adults are overweight or obese, did those folks with "glandular problems" disappear? No; it's just that many others have caught the same disease. Thanks to the obesogen effect, we may all be at risk for some glandular problems.

Traditional diets do not work because they are starvation diets. (also see here, here and here.)

And still, when all is said and done (I have not included any more of the s**t spouted in this piece, emphasis on "piece," if you know what I mean, since it is so amazingly stupid) where does the article finally come to rest?

Is all this a bit disturbing? You bet. Depressing? Not at all. Because you can reconsider the old weight-loss advice — the "diet wisdom" that told you to stop eating burgers, pasta, and ice cream — and go back to eating what you love. Of course you should eat reasonably-sized portions. But the key is to eat natural, obesogen-free versions. Do this while keeping up your exercise program and over time you'll see results. Your waistline, your tastebuds, and even your muscles and libido will thank you.

"...reasonably-sized portions" and "keeping up your exercise" = Calories in vs. Calories out.

Junk food tax could help fight obesity: US study

Makes sense that if you raise the price of an item, less of it will be bought, though this is the absolute wrong way to go to deal with the matter of overweight/obesity (e.g., there are no "healthy foods," everyone is penalized not only the calorically irresponsible, etc.) (Here is the right way.)

Taxing high-fat and sugary junk food is a more effective way to fight obesity than making healthy foods like fruit and vegetables more affordable, a study published Wednesday shows.

Researchers at the University of Buffalo in New York, led by psychologist Leonard Epstein, gave 42 mothers just over 22 dollars to spend at a "supermarket" set up in a room at the university and stocked with images of everything from bananas to whole wheat bread to cola drinks and cookies.

The women were told to imagine that they had no food in the house and that they were going to the supermarket to get the week's shopping for their family.

In the simulated supermarket, the women had the choice of 30 healthy and 30 junk food items, four healthy beverages -- two types of juice, skim milk and water -- and four sugary drinks, all represented in images.

The women went shopping five times. The first time, the prices of all the food and drink items were on par with those in a local supermarket.

Twice, the prices of healthier foods -- those that deliver more nutrients for fewer calories -- were lowered, and on the remaining two shopping trips, the prices of the unhealthy food and drink items were raised.

The researchers found that hiking the price of junk food, as would happen with a so-called "sin tax," was more effective at getting the women to buy a week's shopping that was lower in overall calories than was cutting the price of the healthy food items.

Still, this is collective punishment and hurts the calorically responsible.

The better way to go is to tax those things that only fatsos use (e.g., Nimitz Class scales, Bunyanesque clothes), have the fat pay more for sick care insurance, have them pay more for sick care needs (e.g., greater out-of-pocket contributions for the use of mega-ambulances), etc.

Makers pledge to add safeguards to CT scanners

And they had been doing what until now? Shelf life alert on the safety of medical devices!

An industry group representing the top five manufacturers of CT equipment said on Thursday the companies will add new safeguards to their machines to help prevent patients from being exposed to too much radiation.

The Medical Imaging & Technology Alliance said manufacturers will add a color-coded warning system to give health care providers clear warning when they are doing scans that give patients potentially dangerous doses of radiation.

Note that the scans will still "give patients potentially dangerous doses of radiation."

The "advance" is that there will be a color-coded system of alerts.

Holy DHS - HSAS, Batman!

Better not to need sick care. Get fit, instead.

The Pig Is Clever Like A Fox

Oprah's participation in the weight loss debate is an Orwellian nightmare - the pig is in charge.

Well, the pig is clever like a fox.

Just in time to rollout the new version of the book she co-wrote with Bob Greene, AdipOprah, an IMHO whore-for-the-money and clear threat to people's health, devoted the cover and cover story of her O(bese), The AdipOprah magazine, to her weight woes.

In typical fatso style she basically blames her alleged mere 40-pound weight gain on her poor, defenseless, thyroid gland (again).

She is clearly spewing the slop in which she rolls.

The rollout of her “updated and revised” book together with the rollout of her personal story about why she cannot get the rolls out of her belly are an interesting coincidence.

I will bet, it was not “updated and revised” to tell people it is crap and that she and Bob are liars.

Personally, IMHO, it is nothing more than another attempt by a crooked person to rip-off money from desperate people. (According to the bovine billionaire herself, there are "more than 2.4 million" of them who read the magazine. Add to that the people who watch her TV show, listen to her radio programming, watch her TV network and visit her website and you have an awful lot of impressionable people being fooled.)

What she is talking about this 2008 holiday season is, IMHO, nothing more than another attempt at thievery. This is not new for them as Bob and Oprah, IMHO, have a history of using lies and falsified images to scam the public.

(IMHO, Oprah with Bob are every bit as crooked as Oprah is with her other boys, Mehmet and Michael, David and Jorge.)

Despite the fact that the IMHO whore-for-the-money admits that she was gaining weight beginning "in February 2007," she was too greedy to recuse herself from promoting the diet scheme concocted by her and Bob, instead averring how well it worked for her. Even to this day.

I just pulled this (12-14-08) from their diet website. The website is copyright, 2007. The hardcover edition of the book came out December 26, 2006. The paperback edition came out December 26, 2007. The "I" is fatso "O":

I lost weight in stages. First I became active, and I still work out even though I really hate it, but I know if I don’t I will end up 200 pounds again. Then I started working on my eating. I stopped eating past 7:30 at night. When Bob told me it would make a big difference in my weight, I resisted. I thought it was going to be too hard. But I was surprised to find that it wasn’t; even more surprised when it turned out to be one of the most effective changes I made.

I’ve now taken most of the bad foods out of my diet and replaced them with good. I eat smaller portions and I eat healthy foods as a way of life, not a diet to go on and off.

Liar.

And the picture used on the website to promote the diet is:

Double liar.

(Here are real images of Oprah on her/Bob's diet.

Triple liar.)

Which is the same picture (the background was changed) she and Bob used to rip people off in 2008, on their website:

Quadruple liar.

And other places on the web:



Quintuple liar.

And at a "discount":



Sextuple liar.

And they promoted her and still promote her (12-24-08) as a "success" on their diet (enlarge the image if you have to or just click on it to get to the page):

Septuple liar.

Scummy Oprah and Bob are all talk about integrity as if it means something to them. This is from the complaint to the FTC about Bob and Oprah and their false and deceptive advertising:

"As will be seen in Exhibits A, B and M, there is much made of 'truth' and 'truthfulness' by both Mr. Greene and Ms. Winfrey. Likewise, they speak of accepting responsibility for one’s actions. In fact, 'truthfulness' and 'responsibility' appear in the General Index on pages 272 and 271, respectively, in the hardcover edition.

I submit that in the FTC’s taking of its responsibility it has the opportunity to not only protect consumers from what I contend (and what I posit a reasonable consumer would contend if he/she were aware of them) are clearly false and deceptive advertising practices, but also to provide Ms. Winfrey and Mr. Greene with opportunities to accept responsibility for and the consequences of their dishonesty and untruthfulness."

You can check out the Exhibits here.

Here is their chance to stop the talk and do the walk, which, incidentally, Oprah claims is a big part of the fatso "cure":

"All you have to do is work out harder and eat less! Get your 10,000 steps in!"

What to do?

Give back all the money they took under clearly false pretenses (plus interest earned and any damages), apologize to the world, do some jail time for being the IMHO crooks they are, shut their mouths for good (and the mouths of Oprah's other experts), stop publishing/writing on topics at which they are failures, slither off into the sunset and just go away for good.

That is integrity.

Incidentally, there is one truth among all this drivel of hers.

"All you have to do is…eat less!"

If this means fewer Calories in than out, then she is right.

And what is most important is that you do not need their sh**ty book in order to do that.

Complain to the FTC about her, Bob, Mehmet, Michael, David and Jorge, so it will get these IMHO parasites out from the broadcast media.

The sooner the better. Stop them before they harm again.

You can make a difference.

Oprah and Bob Greene Scamming The Public - Again

The headline links to the Oprahcide or Death By Oprah website.

This link will take you to the Jail For Oprah website where you will find FTC complaints filed re:

Oprah and Bob and

Oprah and her diet expert's books and

Oprah, Jorge Cruise and David Katz.

Here is a picture of Bob and an Oprah that never existed in reality:



I am clear that, IMHO, Oprah and Bob are two of the leaders in the nutritional homicide movement. There are others, like Mehmet Oz, IMHO.

But what is so grossly apparently dishonest, is the Photoshopped image of AdipOprah.

Her entry into the fitness/weight loss domain is like the book Animal Farm.

The pig is in charge.

She claims to be all about integrity, but it is clear to me that she is a dishonest person who has a profit-motivated integrity of convenience that is basically the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help her Photoshop.

This is how Oprah really looks.

Big and fat and with chinny chin chins.

And big thighs and fat ass.

To see more images of AdipOprah and how she really looks following Bob's and Oprah's Best Life Diet, go:

here

here

here

here

here

here

The images above cover the period of time from around the release of their book, December 26, 2006, until just about the present.



But when you are a whore for the money, well, truth in extra-large packaging goes out the door.

However, "Sale Pricing" does not.

Here is a new "deal" Bob and The Killer Queen of Daytime TV are offering.



One look at the real Oprah - same faked image.

One look at the real Oprah - same doomed to fail advice.

One look at the real Oprah - same guaranteed to make you poorer and them richer scam.

This is how The Best Life Diet is described at amazon.com:

"From the bestselling author of Get With the Program! and Bob Greene's Total Body Makeover comes The Best Life Diet, a lifetime plan for losing weight and keeping it off. Bob Greene helped Oprah achieve her dramatic weight loss, and he can help you too. You'll eat the same delicious food that Oprah enjoys, and, just like Oprah, you'll have Bob to encourage you at every step."

Just like he did for Oprah! (see images and image links above, in case you have forgotten how good Bob is and/or how fat Oprah is)

Shame on her.

She should be ashamed but I suspect she is not.

If she ever had an ounce of shame, it has likely been replaced by pounds of fat.

In Oprah's own words:

"Excerpt from The Best Life Diet (sic) - by Oprah Winfrey

You cannot ever live the life of your dreams without coming face to face with the truth. Every unwanted pound creates another layer of lies."

Right.

And Oprah is the multi-layered liar.

Laughing all the way to the bank with your money.

To find out more about what I believe is going on, read the FTC complaint filed regarding her and Bob. It is available here.

Consumer Reports - Profile In Incompetence (Update)

Today is March 09, 2010. No response from CR since June 11, 2007.

Here is a chronicle of my communications with Consumer Reports re: their June 2007 cover story on "Rating the Diets."

The quality of their work is, IMHO, shamefully shoddy and their analytical skills fatally flawed - just like diet programs.

Of particular interest is CR's response, via a Mr. Harzewski speaking for the Editors.

Read it all.

Then, you decide.

To me, these folks are dangerously incompetent.

Caveat subscriber.

To access all the Fitness Rants, click here.

Growing Soda Habit Leads to Early Grave for Thousands of Americans, Study Finds

More insanity.

Six thousand deaths over the last decade could have been avoided if Americans drank less soda and sugary beverages, according to an analysis from the University of California, San Francisco.

First, let's assume that there really were 6000 people who died in 10 years from the soda and sugar scourge.

This calculates to 600 people per year or about 12 per week or just over 1.5 deaths daily.

How does that compare to the national data for the USA?

Deaths and Mortality
(Data are for the U.S.)

Number of deaths: 2,426,264

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 631,636
Cancer: 559,888
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 137,119
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 124,583
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 121,599
Diabetes: 72,449
Alzheimer's disease: 72,432
Influenza and Pneumonia: 56,326
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 45,344
Septicemia: 34,234

On a weekly basis, the above computes to:

Weekly Deaths and Mortality
(Data are for the U.S.)

Number of deaths: 46,659 (the dreaded sugary soda death causes 0.02 % of all weekly deaths)

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 12,147
Cancer: 10,767
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 2637
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 2396
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 2338
Diabetes: 1393
Alzheimer's disease: 1393
Influenza and Pneumonia: 1083
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 872
Septicemia: 658

The data above are from the CDC for the year 2006. This was not a leap year.

On a daily basis, here are the numbers for people who died from the leading causes of death. Soda and sugar according to the study resulted in just over 1.5 deaths per day:

Daily Deaths and Mortality
(Data are for the U.S.)

Number of deaths: 6647 (the dreaded sugary soda death causes 0.02 % of all daily deaths)

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 1731
Cancer: 1534
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 376
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 341
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 333
Diabetes: 198
Alzheimer's disease: 198
Influenza and Pneumonia: 154
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis:124
Septicemia: 94

Second, let's look at who dies this sweet death.

According to the article, here is what the apparent poster child/spokesperson for death by soda says:

Diana Ray of Danville, Ky., is familiar with the negative effects of soda addiction. Since she retired from her job as a registered nurse, Ray's consumption of soda steadily inched upward until she was drinking five to eight cans a day -- as much as an extra 1,200 extra calories and 328 grams of added sugar.

"I always have a Pepsi open on the table next to the bed, when I'm in bed in the morning with my coffee," Ray said. "It's an addiction."

An expensive addiction, Ray added, as the household goes through a 24-pack every other day, which adds up at $7 a pop.

But Ray's biggest motivation for quitting is rescuing her health and well-being: Since she switched from diet to regular soda she has put on 30 pounds, which is "horrifying" to her, especially because diabetes runs in her family.

Clearly it is proper to assume that this "registered nurse"/idiot, whose body changes were "'horrifying' to her" after switching from sugar-free to sugary soda but was not horrified enough to switch back is representative of this group.

I mean, why would ABCNews, the MSM network that brings you AdipOprah Winfrey, David Katz, Jorge Cruise, Mehmet Oz (also spreading his IMHO pollution on other networks), choose someone who is not representative when they are reporting the "NEWS"?

It seems fair to assume that there is no place for an agenda in reporting the news, so it is fair to assume that there is no editorializing or bias to the story and that the fat nurse is representative.

Third, what is the proposed fix for a problem that affects, on an annual basis 0.00019% of the population? (in July 2008 there were 304,059,724 people in the USA)

To encourage Americans to spend their calories elsewhere -- hopefully on more healthful indulgences -- many policymakers support the use of a "soda tax" on all beverages with sugar added, including sodas, sweetened ice teas and chocolate milk.

Punish everybody.

And who, among others, is supporting this?

In his research on the subject, Dr. Kelly Brownell, the director of the Yale Center for Eating and Weight Disorders, said he "propose[s] a one-cent-per-ounce tax...

This is Kelly Brownell, the FAT, anti-junk food crusader:

So, let's review:

• A statistically insignificant problem as described in the research study
• That affects people too stupid to stop when they are "horrified" by what they have done to themselves
• Is impetus for punishing everybody
• By increasing taxes on a product that many can apparently use safely and
• The advocates for the punishment are led by a person who apparently has education, a good income and claims to know how to end this overweight/obesity problem
• But is a fatso

Makes sense.

Role model drinking Nurse Diana Ray's beverage of choice:

Surgery Can Be Effective Tool In Fight Against Weight

So? Any of a number of forms of IMHO malpractice can be "effective tools."

What Morton tells anyone interested in gastric surgery is that it is "no magic bullet…We can't operate our way out of the obesity problem. It's part and parcel of a lifestyle change. These surgeries are simply tools." At Stanford, Morton said, "We don't want to shoehorn anybody into a specific operation. You have to take into consideration the risks and benefits."

Want to get rid of a limp?

Bilateral amputation of the legs is an "effective tool."

Hate the appearance of your nose?

Nose-ectomy (rhinectomy) is an "effective tool."

Want bariatric surgery?

Pay for it yourself or eat fewer Calories than you burn.

Children's Fitness Can Be Improved By Physical Activity Programs In Schools

Lies, damned lies and research.

A study published on bmj.com today reports that a structured physical activity program at school can develop children's fitness and reduce body fat...

However, there was no significant change in overall daily physical activity and quality of life...

In an accompanying editorial, researchers comment that school based physical activity programs are promising. However in the long term, they may be difficult to sustain. Broader implementation of this intervention would considerably add to the school timetable. They conclude that further research is needed in order to study the feasibility and acceptability of such a strategy in different countries.

Ah, the killer appears.

Unsustainability.

Their cure?

More research = more lies, more damned lies and more money for them.

Drinking Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Daily Linked to Diabetes

Simply untrue. It is, by the researchers' own admissions, the Calories.

More Americans now drink sugar-sweetened sodas, sport drinks and fruit drinks daily, and this increase in consumption has led to more diabetes and heart disease over the past decade, researchers reported at the American Heart Association's 50th Annual Conference on Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention...

Sugar-sweetened soda, sport and fruit drinks (not 100 percent fruit juice) contain equivalent calories, ranging from 120 to 200 per drink, and thus play a role in the nation's rising tide of obesity, researchers said. Previous research has linked daily consumption of these sugary beverages to an increased risk of diabetes, even apart from excessive weight gain.

It is all about the Calories, redux.

"The American Heart Association recommends a dietary pattern that is rich in fruit, vegetables, low-fat or fat free dairy products, high-fiber whole grains, lean meat, poultry and fish," said Robert H. Eckel, M.D., past president of the American Heart Association, and professor of medicine at the Anschutz Medical Campus of the University of Colorado Denver. "Always consider overall diet in the context of energy balance and make sure foods and drinks high in added sugars are not taking the place of foods with essential nutrients."

The American Heart Association recommends an upper limit of half of the discretionary calorie allowance from added sugars, which for most American women is no more than 100 calories per day and for most American men is no more than 150 calories per day from added sugars. Sugar-sweetened beverages should be limited to 450 calories or less per week (36oz), based on a 2000 calorie per day diet.

Blaming the messenger (soda) for the real message (you are consuming too many Calories, fatso) will not only get us nowhere, it will set back any attempt at resolving the issue even further than it already is.

The solution of the AHA is to support taxing all of us for the caloric irresponsibility of the fat.

Health policy experts suggest curbing the consumption of sugared drinks through an excise tax of 1 cent per ounce of beverage, which would be expected to decrease consumption by 10 percent.

"If such a tax could curb the consumption of these drinks, the health benefits could be dramatic," said Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, M.D., Ph.D., senior author of the study and associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco.

Rather than do the right thing and target the Calorie abusers, these morons would instead penalize all of us.

Reason enough to put the AHA out of business.

The sooner, the better.

Role model:

Tiny Tongue of a Fruit Fly Could Offer Big Clues in Fight Against Obesity, Researcher Says

How stupid are you if you are a fat person and fall for more of this crap?

The tiny tongue of a fruit fly could provide big answers to questions about human eating habits, possibly even leading to new ways to treat obesity, according to a study from a team of Texas A&M University researchers.

Paul Hardin, who holds the rank of Distinguished Professor of Biology, along with colleagues Abhishek Chatterjee, Shintaro Tanoue and Jerry Houl, examined the taste organs on Drosophila's proboscis (tongue), which triggers the minute fruit fly's desire to eat or not to eat. They found that several factors, especially the creature's internal daily clock, determine feeding behaviors -- and these same taste sensitivities very likely apply to humans.

How many articles that promise the "cure" for overfatness do you have to see day in and day out, week in and week out, month in and month out, year in and year out, decade in and decade out before you get that it ain't coming?

This is your savior:



However, the real "cure," i.e, the only "cure," is already here. Eat fewer Calories than you burn.

The rest, i.e., the latest and greatest research, is all a scam.

"By looking closely at factors that control Drosophila's desire to eat, we can draw comparisons to human eating behaviors," Hardin says.

"If we could adjust the key internal clocks, we might be able to control food consumption and, of course, that would be a big step in the fight against obesity."

If we could just shut you and your ilk up, THAT would be a big step in the fight against obesity.

So would cutting off all your funding.

America's Most Obese Metropolitan Areas

Kudos, metro-fatsos.

A ranking of No. 1 -- or being in the Top 10 -- isn't always something to crow about.

The latest Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index lists the 10 most obese metropolitan areas in the U.S. and finds that adult obesity rates in each are significantly greater than the national average of 26.5%.

Here's a list of the 10 most obese metro areas, with those ranking highest having the greatest obesity rates.

(tie) Montgomery, Ala., and Stockton, Calif.: 34.6%
Visalia/Porterville, Calif.: 34.1%
York/Hanover, Pa.: 34%
Flint, Mich.: 33.9%
McAllen/Edinburg/Mission, Texas: 33.7%
Bakersfield, Calif.: 33.6%
(tie) Lynchburg, Va., and Huntington/Ashland, West Va., Ky., Ohio: 33%
Kingsport/Bristol, Tenn., Va.: 32.9%

Stand proud (if you can stand, that is) and round.

The Child Abuse We Inflict Through Child Obesity

Well, isn't it about time for this?

America is guilty of child abuse. That’s a central conclusion to be drawn from this issue of Health Affairs, devoted to combating child obesity. It is one thing to be a nation that’s allowed two-thirds of its arguably "personally responsible" adults to become overweight or obese. It’s quite another that nearly one in three children now fall into the same category, including kids entering Head Start programs at the ripe old age of four. We also know that the obese among them are predisposed to develop chronic health conditions including diabetes and colon cancer, and to face shorter life spans than their parents’. So what charge would one level against a nation that allowed this to happen, if not of a form of child abuse with horrific consequences?

Though not perfect in many ways, it is movement in the right direction.

Child abusing parents and enabling, law-breaking mandatory reporters, let us hope your days are numbered.

Can Prostate Cancer Be Found Early?

Expired shelf life alert!

At this time, the American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends that men thinking about prostate cancer screening should make informed decisions based on available information, discussion with their doctor, and their own views on the benefits and side effects of screening and treatment (see below).

Radical.

Who ever heard of a recommendation for patients to make an informed decision?

In any event, gone are the days of the rectal exam and PSA test.

For now, that is. Read it all (if you dare).

Still think they have any idea what they are talking about?

Stress Hormone, Depression Trigger Obesity in Girls, Study Finds

Chicken or egg?

Depression raises stress hormone levels in adolescent boys and girls but may lead to obesity only in girls, according to researchers. Early treatment of depression could help reduce stress and control obesity -- a major health issue.

What do you think?

Did depression make this or did this make depression?



Whatever.

The point is for "mental health professionals" to make more money by taking it from you.

Note: "Early treatment of depression could help reduce stress and control obesity -- a major health issue."

Note to mental health professionals: "F*** you."

New Analysis Calls for State and Federal Action to Track Childhood Obesity

And it is about time.

A report published today in the journal Health Affairs calls for increased body mass index surveillance as a tool to combat the childhood obesity epidemic and urges state and federal action to implement effective BMI surveillance systems nationwide. The paper was co-authored by Altarum Institute researchers Matt Longjohn and Amy Sheon, co-project directors of Altarum’s Childhood Obesity Prevention Mission Project, and by childhood obesity experts from Arkansas, California, and Illinois.
BMI – a measure derived from height and weight – is widely used to screen children for obesity.

Still, there are many problems with this proposal. Some examples:

1. They tap into the First Cow's (see image below) childhood obesity initiative which will certainly fail.

2 They do not start tracking when fat people get pregnant and present to their OBs, RNs, etc., so monitoring and interventions can be implemented sooner after the birth of a child at risk, reducing the catch-up distance and costs.

3. They speak of "targeting resources" without speaking of targeting payors for those resources, i.e., collecting funds from the fat parents and parents-to-be in order to pay for the rescue of their fat kids and/or the prevention of fat kids.

Still it is a start in the right direction.

Kudos.

The "First Fatty," America's weight loss/weight control expert:

Early Warning Signs For Future Heart Disease Found In Obese 3-Year-olds

Fat parents have fat kids. Fat kids are nutritionally abused kids.

A study by University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill researchers found that obese children as young as 3 years old have elevated levels of C-reactive protein, a marker of inflammation that in adults is considered an early warning sign for possible future heart disease.

Nutritional child abuse - the abuse that keeps on abusing.

Kudos, fatsos.

U.S.: Controversial diabetes drug harms heart

And you can bet that they will find more problems with the IMHO malpractice known as diet drugs, too.

Hundreds of people taking Avandia, a controversial diabetes medicine, needlessly suffer heart attacks and heart failure each month, according to confidential government reports that recommend the drug be removed from the market.

The reports, obtained by The New York Times, say that if every diabetic now taking Avandia were instead given a similar pill named Actos, about 500 heart attacks and 300 cases of heart failure would be averted every month because Avandia can hurt the heart. Avandia, intended to treat Type 2 diabetes, is known as rosiglitazone and was linked to 304 deaths during the third quarter of 2009.

“Rosiglitazone should be removed from the market,” one report, by Dr. David Graham and Dr. Kate Gelperin of the Food and Drug Administration, concludes. Both authors recommended that Avandia be withdrawn.

Get fit. Avoid the drugs. Save your life.

Childhood Obesity Prevention Should Begin Early In Life, Possibly Before Birth

Clearly. We have been saying this for years.

Efforts to prevent childhood obesity should begin far earlier than currently thought - perhaps even before birth - especially for minority children, according to a new study that tracked 1,826 women from pregnancy through their children's first five years of life.

Most obesity prevention programs - including the national initiative recently launched by First Lady Michelle Obama - target kids age 8 and older. Scientists at the Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute's Department of Population Medicine, an affiliate of Harvard Medical School, now say that factors that place children at higher risk for obesity begin at infancy, and in some cases, during pregnancy. Their research also suggests that risk factors such as poor feeding practices, insufficient sleep and televisions in bedrooms are more prevalent among minority children than white children.

"This early life period - prenatal, infancy, to age 5 - is a key period for childhood obesity prevention, especially for minority children," says Elsie Taveras, lead author of the study and an assistant professor of population medicine at Harvard Medical School, as well as the director of the One Step Ahead Program at Children's Hospital Boston. "Almost every single risk factor in that period before age 2, including in the prenatal period, was disproportionately higher among minority children."

Excellent reasons to:

dissuade the fat from reproducing,
register fat people who do have kids so they can be followed-up,
make fat people pay more for having kids since they require follow-up and
avoid the gross stupidity of the weight loss initiatives of the First Fatty, Michellesie "The Cow" Obama.

Eight In 10 Men 'Will Be Overweight Or Obese By 2020', UK

Get ready for the"Fat With Bad Dentition Biathlon" for the 2022 Games. Maybe if they train at getting fatter even faster, they can qualify for the 2014 Games at Sochi.

A new report from the National Heart Forum has concluded that obesity trends among adults in England are continuing to rise, meaning there will be worrying increases in associated conditions and diseases such as heart disease, cancer and Type 2 diabetes in coming years.

'A 98 per cent rise in Type 2 diabetes'

Led by Oxford University's Professor Klim McPherson the researchers conducted the analysis by preparing forecasts up to 2020 for overweight and obesity levels among adults using the most recent data and comparing them to previous estimates.

The team also updated their predictions for the burdens of diseases and conditions that are attributable to obesity. Their analysis shows a substantial increase in cardiovascular diseases particularly coronary heart disease (CHD). By 2050, they predict a 23 per cent rise in the prevalence of obesity-related stroke, a 34 per cent rise in obesity-related hypertension, a 44 per cent rise in obesity-related coronary heart disease and a 98 per cent rise in Type 2 diabetes.

A gloomy picture of the UK's health

"This new report paints a gloomy picture of the future state of the UK's health. Type 2 diabetes accounts for 90 per cent of all cases of diabetes and obesity is one of its leading causes." said Diabetes UK Care Advisor, Cathy Moulton.

"Historically a condition that only develops in the over 40s, Type 2 diabetes is now worryingly being diagnosed in children as young as seven, a situation almost unheard of just a generation ago, and purely as a result of obesity.

Action needed now

"There is every reason we can reverse these trends if the recommended daily level of 60 minutes' physical activity, achievable for most children, is combined with a healthy balanced diet, rich in fruit and vegetables and low in fat, sugar and salt.

"Unless we take action now, we will be putting a generation at risk of the many devastating complications associated with obesity", said Cathy.

"Now."

Gotta take action "NOW"!

Why haven't we heard that before?

They, like the rest (e.g., Michellesie Obama, The USA's First Cow) are acting NOW - acting according to Brownian Motion, that is.

Raising The Question Of Obesity In Asia

And what have they been doing 'til now?

When it comes to obesity, it would seem that it's very important to define terms, and equally important to ask questions about those terms.

So say Australian, Vietnamese and American scientists who challenge findings published in 1994 which concluded that for a given Body Mass Index (BMI), a measure of body fat based on weight and height, Asians have a higher percentage of body fat than Caucasians.

Nice, isn't it, that they want to define the terms?

And not a moment too soon.

Still think they have any idea what they are talking about?

Child Obesity Rates Going Up

Didn't they just tell us that the rates were going down? (Yes. e.g., see here, here and here)

New research finds that the prevalence of obesity has grown in recent years among children aged 10 to 17, and certain kids are being especially hard hit.

And another study in the same journal points to a possible reason why: Kids are snacking on potato chips, candy and other fattening foods an average of almost three times per day.

So it is the food.

Obesity and overweight kids were more common in neighborhoods that lacked a park or recreation center, and in neighborhoods that parents didn't perceive as safe.

So it is the environment.

Snacking patterns may also be playing a big role in the pediatric obesity epidemic, according to the second study. Researchers Barry Popkin and Carmen Piernas, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, looked at data on more than 31,000 American children from 1977 to 2006.

They found that in 1977-1978, 74 percent of children aged 2 to 18 said they snacked on foods outside of regular mealtime, but by 2003-2006 that number had jumped to 98 percent. The biggest jump occurred with salty treats such as crackers or potato chips, but candy was a favorite snack as well.

Overall, kids consumed 168 more calories from snack foods in 2003-2006 compared to 1977-1978, and the increase was greatest among the very young -- those aged 2 to 6.

"Kids still eat three meals a day, but they're also loading up on high-calorie junk food that contains little or no nutritional value during these snacks," Popkin said in the news release.

So it is the food.

So the above are all excuses.

But there is a reason.

Reasons are different from excuses.

The reason that child obesity rates are going up (and, in general, why kids become fat) is nutritional child abuse by parents.

And they are enabled by law-breaking mandatory reporters - e.g., teachers, doctors, principals and nurses.

Help the kids. (and here, too)

Focus On Fun Gets Teens Active - British Psychological Society

These shrinks are the crazy ones.

Emphasising the emotional benefits of exercise is more effective at increasing levels of physical activity than highlighting traditional health benefits. This is the finding of research published online today, 17th February 2010, in the British Journal of Health Psychology.

The study was carried out by Reema Sirriyeh and colleagues from the University of Leeds. Reema said: "There is evidence that people who believe that physical activity is enjoyable and fun are more likely to engage in sport and exercise. We investigated whether highlighting the emotional benefits of sport and exercise to young people increased their levels of physical activity, more than highlighting the physical health benefits."

128 participants aged 16 to 19 took part in the study; all were recruited from the sixth forms of four schools in West Yorkshire. The teenagers all received a daily text message at 4pm for a period of two weeks. Some teens received text messages that highlighted either the emotional benefits of exercise - such as 'Physical activity can make you feel cheerful. What activity will you do today?' , a second group received texts that highlighted the physical benefits, such as - 'Physical activity can keep your heart healthy. What activity will you do today?' and a further group received text messages that were a combination of the two.

The participants recorded their levels of physical activity using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), which measured the time they spent on of moderate and vigorous exercise.

Analysis of the results found that the physical activity levels of all 128 participants increased after the two-week intervention by an average 31.5 minutes of moderate activity a week. The largest increase in physical activity was seen for inactive teenagers who received the text messages that highlighted the emotional benefits of exercise. This was equivalent to 120 more minutes of moderate exercise.

Not only are the results of this 2-week intervention suspect since the data were self-reported, there are also no data to show that any of this made any difference.

But what is most harmful about this type of research is the emphasis on "fun."

When the "fun" stops, there is no reason to continue.

There should be an emphasis on "because it is good for you," assuming that the activity levels are truly in the range of "good for you" (training) and not simply going through the motions (exercise).

Until people get on board for a sustainable reason, they only get on board for the brief period of time while it is "fun."

This will make no significant positive difference and is another "fun" way to turn people from effective and meaningful physical activity, i.e., training.

Happy People May Have Better Heart Health

Here it is, the final nail in the coffin of improving "heart health."

Individuals who find joy, excitement, and contentment in their daily lives may be protected from cardiovascular disease, researchers found.

Higher levels of positive affect, a measure of happiness, were associated with a significantly lower risk of having a cardiovascular event over a 10-year period (P=0.02), according to Karina Davidson, PhD, of Columbia University Medical Center in New York City, and colleagues...

The findings suggest that strategies to prevent heart disease may be bolstered by increasing an individual's zest for life, they said, noting, however, that this observational data cannot be used to make practice recommendations.

If "making" people happy is what we need to improve "heart health," then clearly the hurdle is set too high.

Or we need to distribute Soma.

In [Brave New World], happiness derives from consuming mass-produced goods, sports such as Obstacle Golf and Centrifugal Bumble-puppy, promiscuous sex, "the feelies", and most famously of all, a supposedly perfect pleasure-drug, soma.

Fat people already hallucinate that they are either not fat or it makes no difference.

With Soma, they will be happier in their hallucinations.