I directed attention to a new study of mortality risk as a function of BMI (see http://tinyurl.com/2agdzu), which concluded that for those conventionally defined as overweight by BMI, it wasn't all that bad, and in some respects, rather good.
On 7 Nov 2007 at 11:11, Paul Brandon wrote: > The key phrase is "obesity was associated with ...." > The usual problems with retrospective studies (nonrandom assignment, > etc.). As someone with a BMI over 25 I'm naturally sympathetic. but > still skeptical. Well yes, of course. A negative association of BMI and some types of death (the new study) doesn't necessarily mean that higher BMI is protective. And a positive association of BMI and mortality (what others claim) doesn't necessarily mean that overweight is what causes us to join the bleedin' choir invisible. But that's the kind of evidence (epidemiological) that's been used to scare us skinny. The point here is that that sort of evidence isn't quite what we've been told. If you look at the data (rather than what the authors typically say about their data), going back over quite a few years, it shows either U- shaped or L-shaped curves, with quite a wide flat region at the minimum over a range of BMI. I'd give references, but I'd just be repeating old posts. This new study merely says it again, perhaps a tad more insistently. And predictably, some are outraged. As Paul started it, I have to point out that I have no axe to grind here, being more likely described as scrawny rather than zaftig. Except that zaftig is a term for women only, and I can't think of a corresponding one for men. Interesting. Stephen ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2600 College St. Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 Canada ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
