Diabetes Weight-Loss Study Ends Early With Surprising Result

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Yes, as I mentioned in the other thread, the "obesity paradox" is really more of a "slightly overweight paradox."

Obesity = higher mortality rate. That's Dream's science failure.

Dream's math failure is best illustrated as follows:

Given two groups of 100 people, we'll say the following two things are true:

1. People with obesity tend - at a normalized (and generous) 90% greater rate - to develop diabetes, heart disease and cancers.
2. People who are obese tend to survive diabetes, heart disease and cancers at a 20% greater rate than do their skinny counterparts.

Group 1 decides "let's true to be thin, it's probably healthier."

Group 2 decides "hey, being fat helps you survive those afflictions, let's get obese"

20 people in Group 1 get sick, but are 20% more likely to die than ...

the 38 people in Group 2

Who dies more?

(hint: it's the obese group)

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

I really don't need steam, the notion that obesity leads to a higher rate of mortality is almost universally accepted.

You continue to fail to understand what you're reading. Which would be fine, but you're going to give some obese person some awful, awful advice.

Might I remind you that you, YOU were the one who presumed to lecture us, early and often, on the fallacious appeal to correlation.

You.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

Yes, as I mentioned in the other thread, the "obesity paradox" is really more of a "slightly overweight paradox."

Obesity = higher mortality rate. That's Dream's science failure.

Dream's math failure is best illustrated as follows:

Given two groups of 100 people, we'll say the following two things are true:

1. People with obesity tend - at a normalized (and generous) 90% greater rate - to develop diabetes, heart disease and cancers.
2. People who are obese tend to survive diabetes, heart disease and cancers at a 20% greater rate than do their skinny counterparts.

Group 1 decides "let's true to be thin, it's probably healthier."

Group 2 decides "hey, being fat helps you survive those afflictions, let's get obese"

20 people in Group 1 get sick, but are 20% more likely to die than ...

the 38 people in Group 2

Who dies more?

(hint: it's the obese group)

Flegal: 25,000 excess deaths attributed to obesity, 33,000 to being underweight. Relatively fewer deaths in two heaviest groups (overweight, obese) than in two leanest groups (underweight, normal).

Reminder: You.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

1. Not attributed to.

2. Flegal: All obesity groups had higher mortality rates than the group below obese.

Reminder: you haven't understood anything you've read.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Relative to normal weight, both obesity (all grades) and grades 2 and 3 obesity were associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

1. Not attributed to.

2. Flegal: All obesity groups had higher mortality rates than the group below obese.

Reminder: you haven't understood anything you've read.

1. Yes, all about her.

2. Yes, above Grade I obese (a place you said was dangerous to be) almost as many excess deaths as underweight, but not enough to write home about, certainly not enough for people like you to badger fat people into doing something all the studies suggest that they are highly unlikely to do, maintain weight-loss.

You can't read a study. All you can read is an abstract. But you do know how to appeal to correlations (while castigating others for using them).

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

Relative to normal weight, both obesity (all grades) and grades 2 and 3 obesity were associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality.

Uh-oh, the font is getting bigger again. Weak argument, yell loud.

Earlier we heard forebodings from you about going over BMI 30.

Reminder: you.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Dream: Look, Flegal says it's ok to be obese.

Flegal: Learn to read, dream.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Relative to normal weight, both obesity (all grades) and grades 2 and 3 obesity were associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality.

This is the person you're citing when you say the exact opposite. Please, please do not give any advice to obese people until you recognize that you're completely wrong about this.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

This is the person you're citing when you say the exact opposite. Please, please do not give any advice to obese people until you recognize that you're completely wrong about this.

I didn't say she didn't. You are disagreeing with what she did say (and may be killing people in the process).

Flegal: 111,000 deaths attributed to obesity (without any credible evidence that anyone dies of being fat, per se, but rather from diseases associated with obesity).

86,000 fewer deaths in overweight category, overweight category included among obese. Thus, 25,000 excess deaths due to obesity, fewer than are attributed to being underweight.

Broken down by category: overweight 6% lower risk, Grade I obese 5% lower risk (yet you said ...).

Broken down further: women over 50 with BMI 34 lived longest of all (yet you said ...). Among non-smokers under 60, obese live longer than normal weight (yet you said ...).

Statistics Canada: Grade I obese live longer, Grade II obese live longer, Morbid obese no statistical difference (yet you said ...).

Brazil study: Grade I obese live longer (yet you said ...).

Norway Study: morbidly obese women live longer than normal weight men (yet you said ...).

Obesity Paradox: myriad studies (over decades) show obesity confers certain immunities for any number of medical conditions.

Further: studies show that obesity is HIGHLY heritable.

All studies show: vast majority cannot maintain weight-loss, majority end up heavier than when they began.

Other studies: weight-loss associated with risk for hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, eating disorders, premature death.

Your best bet: counsel people to choose their parents more wisely so as to conform to your crude and churlish sensibilities.

[bakaduin]

Oh Dream.....your arguments for obesity get further from reality with every post.

[yellowgator]

I have a lady on Visalus who also has Type II Diabetes. She has currently on the 90 Day Challenge to fight obesity and diabetes. She had a doctors visit a few days ago and was told she was doing a phenomenal job in just a month. The objective of this company is to fight such problems in America. This is the reason I signed up to promote and use this product. I hate seeing where we are heading and want to change the world one shake at a time. Stop eating fast food and start putting healthier meals in your body. If you have any questions check my site out or email me.

http://bbvhardwork.bodybyvi.com/challenge

yellagator@gmail.com

GO GATORS!!!

[MeyerIsBack]

Originally Posted by yellowgator

The objective of this company is to fight such problems in America.

Wait... what? This is a MLM company selling a mixture of sucralose and soy powder at like a 1000% markup.

[yellowgator]

Yes its a MLM company with results. Sucralose=artificial sweetener (Splenda). The shake will provide 20-25 grams of protein (soy protein), a full serving of fiber, calcium, prebiotics, digestive enzymes, vitamins, minerals, and more, all for around 240 calories. If we compare that to an ‘average’ breakfast of a bagel with cream cheese, small orange juice and coffee with non-fat milk, you can see we provide more nutrition for less calories. The ‘average’ breakfast can add up to around 720 calories, and a whopping 880mg of sodium. So by having a shake, you’ll fuel your body, help keep your blood sugar level, and save calories to help you keep the weight off. We also recommend it for those people that don’t eat breakfast (almost 40% of adults don’t eat breakfast). By not eating breakfast, the metabolism can slow and you may end up eating more calories per day while slowing the body’s fat burning system. Your body is like a car, it cannot run without fuel and it cannot be ‘trained’ to do without. So the shake once a day helps keep the metabolism going, keeps you energized, and helps cut calories.

[MeyerIsBack]

Originally Posted by yellowgator

By not eating breakfast, the metabolism can slow and you may end up eating more calories per day while slowing the body’s fat burning system. Your body is like a car, it cannot run without fuel and it cannot be ‘trained’ to do without. So the shake once a day helps keep the metabolism going, keeps you energized, and helps cut calories.

Wait... what? Says who?

Anyways, the point is that it is a bunch of cheap ingredients sold at a massive premium. MLM is a whole different discussion but there is a reason they don't sell this product through traditional avenues.

[LeafUF]

You are really shilling for the SOY protein? Are you effing serious? That is the last protein I would recommend to anyone.

Oh and by the way I deadlifted 335x5 this morning on an empty stomach after training 3 clients.

[LeafUF]

Bodybyvi, Shakeology, Isagenix = Overpriced scams with armies of marketers trying to rip you off.

[MeyerIsBack]

Originally Posted by LeafUF

You are really shilling for the SOY protein? Are you effing serious? That is the last protein I would recommend to anyone.

Oh and by the way I deadlifted 335x5 this morning on an empty stomach after training 3 clients.

How did you do that with no fuel in your car? I am pretty sure having a cloned website on BodyByVi makes him an authoritative source on metabolism.

[Dreamliner]

BodyByVi = another scam.

[Gatormb]

If you want a meal replacement shake try www.idealshape.com

Half the price and you're not paying for mlm black BMW's.

BTW BodyByVi is the same folks as P90X. That's where they get the 90 challenge from.