SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Job]

She should so do that.
England is a local country...for local people.

 

[Scouse]

Don't shoot the messenger but science says there's no such thing as 'fat but fit'.

 

[Raven]

Just putting it out there. That is an unverified study that is yet to be peer reviewed, so essentially an opinion at the moment. It also states quite clearly that its just a higher chance, not guaranteed. Misleading headline from the gutter press.

Not that it probably isn't true that fat = higher chance of heart disease...but that is like saying if it rains you will get wet.

 

[Scouse]

Bit porkier than we should be eh @Raven?

*gentle ribbing*

To be fair - when I linked to the story it was you I was thinking of as you'd been a fit not fat supporter. I have always been sceptical of that (because = how?, fatness is structural unhealthiness).

But meh. Maybe the study will gently prod a few people to skip a fee rounds of toast or to go for a daily half hour evening walk eh?

 

[Raven]

Mostly but the headline is demonstrably wrong, even the study does not suggest that fat = unfit, just a higher chance, which like I said, is the same as saying if it is raining you will get wet.

My old man, nearly 60, runs the London marathon every year, cycles 30 miles a day and spent nearly 25 years of his life jumping out of planes with shit loads of kit strapped to him. zero health problems. Yeah, he is a bit of a porker too.

 

[Job]

Depends on the individual...slightly overweight people do better after illness and surgery, but getting type 2 diabetes, dodgy knees and always being lardy are guaranteed for most people who are 2-4 stone overweight.
Which is me atm, but working on it...the problem us I dont look fat, everyone says..jeez you dont need to lose anything...which doesnt help my enthusiasm to diet.

 

[Scouse]

even the study does not suggest that fat = unfit, just a higher chance

Duh. Of course. That's not something to bash the study with tho. ALL of these studies are about a statistically higher chance of <insert bad thing>.

If it was not just a higher chance but of bad things definitely happening then the headline would be "being fat DEFINITELY kills every single fat person ever!!!1!"

But that's moronically absurd. And obviously so.

So no. The headline is not "demonstrably wrong" (and it doesn't "depend on the individual").

This is how to look at it : Being overweight is like playing Russian Roulette - you're playing a clearly dangerous game but some people dodge the bullet. The lucky fucks.

Probably best not to play the game tho eh?

 

[Scouse]

the problem us I dont look fat, everyone says..jeez you dont need to lose anything...which doesnt help my enthusiasm to diet.

This is actually a very important thing (goes back to that what's "normative" argument that @Gwadien spectacularly failed to grasp).

There are so many fat people in Britain now that being your correct weight is abnormal. So the image people have in their brains of what a healthy human looks like is actually an unhealthy human.

So you get what you've got @Job - people saying "you don't need to lose weight" - and it being demotivational, even though you know that you're overweight and want to do something about it. It's fat people making it harder for you to be the weight you know you should be.

I hope you get to the weight you want to be m8. But when you get there don't be surprised when everyone starts telling you that you're "too thin" and that "you should put on some weight", or (my favourite) "you look unhealthy!" - as they tuck into food that you now can clearly see isn't actually food - just poisonous shit that's bad for them that makes them cranky when they don't get their fix often enough.

 

[Raven]

Duh. Of course. That's not something to bash the study with tho. ALL of these studies are about a statistically higher chance of <insert bad thing>.

If it was not just a higher chance but of bad things definitely happening then the headline would be "being fat DEFINITELY kills every single fat person ever!!!1!"

But that's moronically absurd. And obviously so.

So no. The headline is not "demonstrably wrong" (and it doesn't "depend on the individual").

This is how to look at it : Being overweight is like playing Russian Roulette - you're playing a clearly dangerous game but some people dodge the bullet. The lucky fucks.

Probably best not to play the game tho eh?

I'm not bashing the study. I am bashing the dumb headline from the dumb news source.

 

[Scouse]

I'm not bashing the study. I am bashing the dumb headline from the dumb news source.

No such thing as "fat but fit"?

That's not dumb. It's accurate. If you're fat, you're unfit and playing russian roulette with your health. Period.

You may be lucky. You may not. But you're playing the game.

 

[Raven]

But that statement, quite clearly, and recognised by the study, is untrue.

The headline says that if you are fat you are unfit. The study says you have a higher chance of being unfit.

 

[Moriath]

Who on earth would buy something like this

 

[Raven]

Dumb shit for dumb people that have too much disposable income. They probably work in the marketing pyramid scheme or something.

 

[Rubber Bullets]

But that statement, quite clearly, and recognised by the study, is untrue.

The headline says that if you are fat you are unfit. The study says you have a higher chance of being unfit.

There are differences between fit and healthy and neither is binary. Fitness is a measure of how much exercise you can do, ie aerobic stamina as well as muscular strength, flexibility and body composition. These are linked but not entirely dependant on each other.

Health clearly overlaps with fitness in these areas too but goes much further with blood pressure and sugar, heart rate etc. being just as important or even more so.

It is possible to be overweight and 'fit' by three out of the four measures of fitness. It is possible to be overweight and 'healthy', that is have low blood pressure, heart rate blood sugar etc.

Also no one is guaranteed to have a stroke or heart disease or diabetes or any of the other health conditions related to excess weight, it is simply that your statistical chance increases as you weight increases. The flip side is that you can still get these conditions even if you are a healthy weight.

What this study appears to say is that if you are overweight then regardless of how your health is currently, or how fit you are, you still have that increased statistical risk associated with your excess bulk.

So the headline is hyperbole, and not accurate at face value, but perhaps it will make people think a bit more about their weight and at least understand the risks they are taking.

 

[Rubber Bullets]

Who on earth would buy something like this

Especially as you could cut the crotch out of any pair of jeans, add a pair of suspenders and have essentially the same thing. At least taking a piss be easier!

 

[Raven]

There are differences between fit and healthy and neither is binary. Fitness is a measure of how much exercise you can do, ie aerobic stamina as well as muscular strength, flexibility and body composition. These are linked but not entirely dependant on each other.

Health clearly overlaps with fitness in these areas too but goes much further with blood pressure and sugar, heart rate etc. being just as important or even more so.

It is possible to be overweight and 'fit' by three out of the four measures of fitness. It is possible to be overweight and 'healthy', that is have low blood pressure, heart rate blood sugar etc.

Also no one is guaranteed to have a stroke or heart disease or diabetes or any of the other health conditions related to excess weight, it is simply that your statistical chance increases as you weight increases. The flip side is that you can still get these conditions even if you are a healthy weight.

What this study appears to say is that if you are overweight then regardless of how your health is currently, or how fit you are, you still have that increased statistical risk associated with your excess bulk.

So the headline is hyperbole, and not accurate at face value, but perhaps it will make people think a bit more about their weight and at least understand the risks they are taking.

Well, that was my point.

The Guardian have taken a non peer reviewed, non published report that clearly states that fat people have an increased chance of becoming ill later in life, not guaranteed, basically what we already know and run with a headline suggesting all fat people become ill.

Which is incorrect and typifies the bad reporting in the press, Scouse just happened to pick up on it and decided that it was true because it enforces his own belief, despite the fact that it is clearly not at all what the researchers found. A fine example of confirmation bias, something he is always harping on about.

 

[Rubber Bullets]

To be fair I was, to some extent, agreeing with both of you. That's the problem, you both spend so much time scoring points off each other you don't notice the stuff you agree on

It is possible to be overweight and fit and healthy, but just because a person is doesn't mean they should be complacent and assume that they will remain that way.

 

[Raven]

Yeah I know, I realise that. But some people just are fat and no amount of exorcise will change that...a tiny minority yes but it is a thing (my old man being one)

My wife is the other way around, she might as well have a conveyor belt attached to her chin piling in cakes, she just doesn't put weight on.

 

[Scouse]

the headline says that if you are fat you are unfit. The study says you have a higher chance of being unfit.

Incorrect. The russian roulette analogy is accurate.

The study says if you're unfit you have a higher chance of <something bad> and that if you're fat, you're unfit.

run with a headline suggesting all fat people become ill

Doesn't say that at all. Your comprehension skills are woeful.

But you're carrying a few extra pounds, so don't like the headline. I get that and will now leave this alone

 

[Raven]

Yes, it does..."No such thing as 'fat but fit', major study finds" If you are too stupid to comprehend English, then leap to a conclusion based on a headline and an extremely poorly written article in a bottom of the pile rag, about an unpublished paper that hasn't even been peer-reviewed, then that is up to you. It does make one wonder how many other idiotic sources you use to build up your idea of the world though.

I have corrected you now and you are still incapable of understanding simple English, your problem.

 

[Scouse]

unpublished paper that hasn't even been peer-reviewed

Cohort study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology that is one of a number of studies that effectively say "there's no such thing as fat but fit".

Can't be any clearer than that. Do you think that being overweight affects reading and basic comprehension?

 

[Raven]

Erm, you do realise that is an entirely different study by an entirely different group, right? One that studied low bmi in youths and how it effected them later in life.

 

[Gwadien]

This is actually a very important thing (goes back to that what's "normative" argument that @Gwadien spectacularly failed to grasp).

There are so many fat people in Britain now that being your correct weight is abnormal. So the image people have in their brains of what a healthy human looks like is actually an unhealthy human.

So you get what you've got @Job - people saying "you don't need to lose weight" - and it being demotivational, even though you know that you're overweight and want to do something about it. It's fat people making it harder for you to be the weight you know you should be.

I hope you get to the weight you want to be m8. But when you get there don't be surprised when everyone starts telling you that you're "too thin" and that "you should put on some weight", or (my favourite) "you look unhealthy!" - as they tuck into food that you now can clearly see isn't actually food - just poisonous shit that's bad for them that makes them cranky when they don't get their fix often enough.

Must be pretty difficult to be perfect, m8.

 

[Scouse]

Must be pretty difficult to be perfect, m8.

Yep. Harder than just giving up and saying "it's OK to be fat dear" ... How's your anorexia workin' out?


Edit: Anyway, this a better source for the bitter? It's pretty much the same headline across all the media, because that's what the study says...

 

[Scouse]

effected

*affected

 

[Raven]

lol

 

[old.user4556]

Back to some random spam.

I was thinking in the car on the way home: all this gender fluid / neutral / non-binary bollocks and it's elimination of gendered pronouns - I wonder if this might have an impact on French and German with their silly "male and female" objects? It'd sure make learning German muuuuuuuuuuch easier.

 

[Raven]

Give it time and I am sure the delicates will be all over raising awareness on twitter.

 

[Scouse]

I was thinking in the car on the way home: all this gender fluid / neutral / non-binary bollocks and it's elimination of gendered pronouns - I wonder if this might have an impact on French and German with their silly "male and female" objects? It'd sure make learning German muuuuuuuuuuch easier.

Aye.

I can see people's objection to it in the real world. I was surprised to read everyone's reaction's to @Gwadien's post about gender neutrality and sexism being designed out of Artificial Intelligences though. If there's one space that, intellectually, needs to be bob-on is AI design - especially if it's going to make decisions for us in the future.

We can be messy as fuck in the real world - have all our differing opinions - but not in AI systems.

 

[Bodhi]

Just flown from Heathrow to Houston on United Airlines and didn't get punched once!

Actually to be fair, they were actually pretty decent. Lots of drink on offer, and the steward always remembered what I ordered. Flight was half empty though...