My claim is that there is insufficient data to show a causal link between being significantly overweight (within reason, say BMI < 40) and negative health consequences when controlling for other known detrimental behaviors and health risk factors. That said, there is certainly an interaction effect whereas a higher BMI can tend to exacerbate underlying health issues/comorbidities. That is, it is erroneous to look at a fat person and tell them that they are necessarily unhealthy without having a more nuanced understanding of their overall health, other risk factors and activity levels.

Further, I believe it is erroneous to claim that long term weight loss is an achievable goal in all individuals, and that instead encouragement should be directed towards improvement in the overall health of the individual rather than emphasizing the primary goal of weight loss. Even if it were clear beyond all doubt that obesity directly caused the negative health effects it is psychologically pragmatic to avoid conflating body-image issues and health concerns. Finally, from an etiquette standpoint, it is inappropriate and counterproductive to comment on the health consequences of the behavior of an individual unless you are employed by that individual as a health professional or are otherwise a close, concerned acquaintance of that individual.

In other words saying, "you fatties shouldn't be on TV, think of the children," isn't exactly productive nor appropriate.

Clear enough?

Cheers. At least you are attempting some objectivity.

>> ^scannex:

Direct question then.
Is it your stance that claiming there are negative health consequences from being obese is erroneous?
Is it your stance that there is insufficent data to show a causal link between being significantly overweight (obese) and health problems?
>> ^bmacs27:
@scannex The claim is that many of the negative health consequences associated with obesity, e.g. cardiac arrest, are in fact dependent on other factors with which obesity is commonly comorbid. I showed you a case in which less hypertensive adult women showed no effect of BMI on mortality across the board. Your studies failed to address that so far. Even in the latest, it shows that many of the complications involve comorbidity, not obesity in its own right. Even when it talks about diabetes it talks about the protective effect of vitamin E. Now, if you want to start talking about joint replacements or whatever, fine, but then we should probably tell people to be careful about their morning run too.

Direct question then.
Is it your stance that claiming there are negative health consequences from being obese is erroneous?
Is it your stance that there is insufficent data to show a causal link between being significantly overweight (obese) and health problems?

>> ^bmacs27:

@scannex The claim is that many of the negative health consequences associated with obesity, e.g. cardiac arrest, are in fact dependent on other factors with which obesity is commonly comorbid. I showed you a case in which less hypertensive adult women showed no effect of BMI on mortality across the board. Your studies failed to address that so far. Even in the latest, it shows that many of the complications involve comorbidity, not obesity in its own right. Even when it talks about diabetes it talks about the protective effect of vitamin E. Now, if you want to start talking about joint replacements or whatever, fine, but then we should probably tell people to be careful about their morning run too.

@scannex The claim is that many of the negative health consequences associated with obesity, e.g. cardiac arrest, are in fact dependent on other factors with which obesity is commonly comorbid. I showed you a case in which less hypertensive adult women showed no effect of BMI on mortality across the board. Your studies failed to address that so far. Even in the latest, it shows that many of the complications involve comorbidity, not obesity in its own right. Even when it talks about diabetes it talks about the protective effect of vitamin E. Now, if you want to start talking about joint replacements or whatever, fine, but then we should probably tell people to be careful about their morning run too.

>> ^PCGuy123:

>> ^syncron:
Couldn't she just remove the key to kill the engine?

(beaten by snoozedoctor)
No, this model of Kia Sorento had a proximity key, so she could start the car by just having the key fob on her person. I guess there is no way to turn off the car while it's in gear.
I'm finding inconsistent news articles on this story: one said the police don't know why the car finally stopped, while another article indicates the driver followed a troopers advice and lifted up the accelerator pedal while pressing on the brake, which made the car stop. But another article claimed the brakes were burned out already. The driver also put the car in neutral but that had no effect.
Kia Motors responded this was an isolated incident. I'm suspicious that Kia could do a thorough test on this in less than a day.


Just FYI, I believe you can turn off the car in Keyless ignition systems by holding in the button for x-seconds. Just knowledge that might help if this happens to anyone else.

>> ^syncron:

Hello class action suit.
>> ^PCGuy123:
>> ^syncron:
Couldn't she just remove the key to kill the engine?

No, this model of Kia Sorento had a proximity key, so she could start the car by just having the key fob on her person. I guess there is no way to turn off the car while it's in gear.
I'm finding inconsistent news articles on this story: one said the police don't know why the car finally stopped, while another article indicates the driver followed a troopers advice and lifted up the accelerator pedal while pressing on the brake, which made the car stop. But another article claimed the brakes were burned out already. The driver also put the car in neutral but that had no effect.
Kia Motors responded this was an isolated incident. I'm suspicious that Kia could do a thorough test on this in less than a day.



You could be onto something: I wonder if all electric ignition cars need some kind of emergency cut-off switch installed, in case of situations like this one with the Kia Sorento?

I have electric ignition on my 2012 Toyota, need to check to see if there is any kind of override...

EDIT: on my keyless starter I have to press and hold the starter button for 3 seconds, which should cut the engine off. But that feature may not be the same for other keyless starter systems.

Apparently the NHTSA has proposed standardizing keyless ignition systems in an effort to help reduce accidents related to these systems, per this article: http://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/feds-propose-standardization-of-keyless-ignition-systems

From the article:
"The agency also wants to specify the amount of time necessary to push the control to stop the engine. A driver should be able to stop the car immediately in an emergency without having to wait too long to hold the ignition control in order to do so. Keyless ignition control systems have been linked partly to the sudden unintended acceleration crisis at Toyota. In August 2009, a Lexus being driven by an off-duty California Highway Patrol officer went out of control accelerated to excessive speeds and crashed. All 4 occupants of the car were killed instantly. In the Lexus that was involved in the accident, the driver needed to hold the keyless control for as long as 3 seconds in order to cut the engine. In 2007, there was a similar accident involving a Honda Accord. The driver wanted to switch off the engine in an emergency using the keyless ignition, but could not do so."

Hello class action suit.
>> ^PCGuy123:

>> ^syncron:
Couldn't she just remove the key to kill the engine?

No, this model of Kia Sorento had a proximity key, so she could start the car by just having the key fob on her person. I guess there is no way to turn off the car while it's in gear.
I'm finding inconsistent news articles on this story: one said the police don't know why the car finally stopped, while another article indicates the driver followed a troopers advice and lifted up the accelerator pedal while pressing on the brake, which made the car stop. But another article claimed the brakes were burned out already. The driver also put the car in neutral but that had no effect.
Kia Motors responded this was an isolated incident. I'm suspicious that Kia could do a thorough test on this in less than a day.

>> ^syncron:

Couldn't she just remove the key to kill the engine?


(beaten by snoozedoctor)
No, this model of Kia Sorento had a proximity key, so she could start the car by just having the key fob on her person. I guess there is no way to turn off the car while it's in gear.

I'm finding inconsistent news articles on this story: one said the police don't know why the car finally stopped, while another article indicates the driver followed a troopers advice and lifted up the accelerator pedal while pressing on the brake, which made the car stop. But another article claimed the brakes were burned out already. The driver also put the car in neutral but that had no effect.

Kia Motors responded this was an isolated incident. I'm suspicious that Kia could do a thorough test on this in less than a day.

>> ^Hmmm:

They are tazing him...why exactly? Possession of a weapon (cigarette)?


Because they fucking feel like it! YougotaproblemBITCH?!?!? ZZZZZZZZZZZZAAAAAAAAAAP!

No, seriously though, this is horrible. Tasing someone should be a second to last resort (guns being last), NOT a first resort.

You can clearly see how easy it was for them to take this guy down even though the taser had no effect. That's exactly why it didn't need to be used.

"Most economists" did not see the collapse coming, so why believe "most economists" know anything now?

The economic collapse was set in motion with the Free Houses for Poor People Act in the 70s, a liberal creation muscled-up during the Clinton years.

Government "guaranteed" bank loans to people who had no business owning homes, because it's "unfair" that not everyone has a house. So, half-coercion, half promising bailouts with taxpayer money.

Even in decades-old systems like Medicare, where you'd think there would be built-in watchdogs, we lose 60 billion A YEAR to fraud, waste and abuse, so how anyone sane thought a one-time scamulus would be closely monitored for fraud...

A similar Nude Eel scamulus was attempted in the 40s with little to no effect. FDR's bacon was only saved by WW2.


Government: If you think the problems are bad, wait till you see our solutions!

I lay corrected.
>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^gwiz665:
False. The more people you love, have no effect on your strength.>> ^Yogi:
"The more people you love the weaker you are." Is it wrong that I actually live by this but believe the exact opposite?


Au contraire, a little syphilis will take the spring out of your step.

>> ^gwiz665:

False. The more people you love, have no effect on your strength.>> ^Yogi:
"The more people you love the weaker you are." Is it wrong that I actually live by this but believe the exact opposite?



Au contraire, a little syphilis will take the spring out of your step.

False. The more people you love, have no effect on your strength.


>> ^Yogi:

"The more people you love the weaker you are." Is it wrong that I actually live by this but believe the exact opposite?

>> ^alien_concept:

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
The video doesn't play at all for me, no message or anything, hitting the play button has no effect.

That's very odd.. I'll get on it


Same here even on CollegeHumor's web site!

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

The video doesn't play at all for me, no message or anything, hitting the play button has no effect.


That's very odd.. I'll get on it

The video doesn't play at all for me, no message or anything, hitting the play button has no effect.