The guy likes to eat. So what?
Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson basically says Christie is too unhealthy to be president.
In contrast, we don’t think Christie is fit to be president because his thought process is suspect as evidenced by his embrace of Al Gore-ism.
The problem with Christie isn’t that he’s fat; it’s that he’s a fathead.
Studies are wonderful things, and every participant in every study has the same genes. Interesting, isn’t it?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.cancer.gov/aboutnci/ncicancerbulletin/archive/2007/121807/page4
Mediterranean Diet and Physical Activity Associated with Lower Death Rates
Separate analyses from the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study indicated significant reductions in the overall death risk for people who adhere to the so-called “Mediterranean diet” as well as among those who engaged in physical activity levels suggested by national exercise guidelines, according to two studies published in the December 10/24 Archives of Internal Medicine.
The NIH-AARP study was developed by an NCI research team that is now part of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (DCEG). The study monitored the health status of more than 500,000 AARP members in the U.S. aged 50-71 from 1995 to 2005 using mailed questionnaires, death records, and tumor registry data.
In the first study, researchers used a 9-point scale to assess adherence among 380,296 healthy AARP members to the Mediterranean dietary pattern, which includes high intake of vegetables, legumes, fruits, nuts, whole grains, fish, higher intake of mono-unsaturated than saturated fat, moderate alcohol consumption, and low red meat intake. The dietary pattern was associated with a 21-percent decreased risk of all-cause mortality (17 percent for cancer deaths and 22 percent for cardiovascular deaths) in men, and a 20-percent decreased risk of all-cause mortality (12 percent for cancer deaths and 19 percent for cardiovascular deaths) in women. The beneficial effect of the Mediterranean dietary pattern was more pronounced in smokers, especially those with a healthy body mass index.
In the second study, researchers examined the effect of adherence to national guidelines for both “moderate” and “vigorous” physical activity among 252,925 AARP members. Compared with inactive, sedentary respondents, people who engaged in moderate exercise (at least 30 minutes, most days of the week) had a 27-percent decrease in overall mortality, and those who exercised vigorously (at least 20 minutes, three times a week) reduced their death risk by 32 percent.
“Our findings strongly confirm the importance of these national physical activity guidelines,” noted study leader Dr. Michael Leitzmann of DCEG’s Nutritional Epidemiology Branch. A secondary finding showed that even those individuals who engaged in physical activity at less than the guideline recommendations had a reduced mortality risk.
DCEG is pursuing additional research on physical activity, Dr. Leitzmann added. “We’re now drilling down to the effect of exercise on specific forms of cancer. Those impacts may differ from that on total mortality,” he said.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Lots more here:
http://dietandhealth.cancer.gov/publications.html#2011
Damn those pesky facts:
“Our basic physiology – the way the human body functions – hasn’t changed over the last 50 to 100 years, yet during that time we have seen an alarming increase in obesity in our society.”
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=56467
++++++++++++++++++++
Half-time for genetics. “Indeed, Venter has wasted little time in playing down the importance of the genes he has catalogued. He cites the example of colon cancer, which is often associated with a defective “colon cancer” gene. Even though some patients carry this mutated gene in every cell, the cancer only occurs in the colon because it is triggered by toxins secreted by bacteria in the gut. Cancer, argues Venter, is an environmental disease.”
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/nature-versus-nurture-revisited.html
Pops, being diabetic is genetic, and what you eat has nothing to do with what age you start getting the symptoms, as that is hard-wired into your body. However, once your body has gone into diabetes, your diet can sometimes control it to a certain extent. You cannot be “cured” of diabetes, you can only control it to the point of not having the particular symptoms that we associate with diabetes. If you could be cured, then you could go back to eating anything you want.
As an example: I have a non-functioning thyroid gland. By taking synthroid, I am “cured” of the symptom of having too little of the substance that the synthroid replaces. However, I am not cured of my underlying thyroid problem, and cannot be. I have taken synthroid since I was eleven years old, and will continue to take it the rest of my life.
It is funny that we have both obesity and diabetes epidemics, and yet deaths from heart attacks, strokes, and such are falling, and we are living longer and more productive lives. And, point of fact, what the heck does the term obesity mean? Did anyone do a study to determine what a “normal” weight is, or do an analysis of what weights are optimal to good health and longevity? This is very much like the idea that everyone needs a certain amount of fiber in their diet to be healthy, it was pulled out of thin air and presented as gospel truth, and it has seldom been questioned. We can put that idea up on the shelf along with salt being bad, and you should drink 8 glasses of water a day, and exercise makes you healthy.
I’ve seen many people of all sizes go into full-blown anorexia with nothing but encouragement from their peers, the media, and even their doctors. It’s sickening to see people be afraid to eat tiny amounts of “junk” food or compulsively exercise while starving themselves.
Pops, to avoid giving huge numbers of replies, I’m combining. How about, the Helsinki Businessman Study (http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2009/06/paradoxes-compel-us-to-think-part-two.html)? A study dedicated to a group near and dear to my heart. White men with desk jobs. In short, overweight and mildly obese men llived longer that “normal” weight or “thin” men, and losing weight was associated with MASSIVELY INCREASED mortality. This wasn’t some single-digit change. Men who dropped a weight category over the course of the thirty-year study were twice as likely to not make it to the year 2006 end point as those who were consistently overweight. That is significant enough to be clinically tenable above confounding factors (such as diseases that caused weight loss before death).
Comparing photographs: Christie looks like a ‘middleweight’ compared to President Taft, who (at about 300+ pounds) appeared to have about a 50-pound weight advantage over Christie.
Ben of Houston | September 30, 2011 at 4:35 pm | Reply
Pops, don’t make be break out the JunkFoodScience links.
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2006/11/obesity-paradox-1.html
Thanks, Ben of Houston. Why is this not common wisdom? My hypochondria goes into full tilt every time I step on the scale (though everyone I know thinks I’m “thin”, I’m at least 30# over my ideal in the BMI charts). Do you mean that it’s OK to trust my vitals?
I’ve thought that Gov. Christie was well fed because of prosperity, but not morbidly obese. Of course, his longer life expectancy (with regard solely to cardiovascular concerns, of course) may be politically problematic, as it might give him more opportunity to mount a viable campaign, Heaven forbid….
First, a reminder that our genes (including nasty ones that give us diabetes) have been around the block a few times…
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101216142523.htm
…we’re talking millions of years.
Second, a few examples detailing the current epidemic of diabetes in children…
http://www.diabetes.org.nz/news/world_news/diabetes_and_obesity_epidemic_in_children_international_call_to_action
http://clinical.diabetesjournals.org/content/19/3/102.full
http://michael-reinsdorf662288.suite101.com/children-and-teen-diabetes-is-nearly-epidemic-a159315
http://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/447138
…there are thousands more examples.
Thirdly, (US) government figures concerning the current epidemic of obesity in children…
http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/obesity/facts.htm
…note that, “childhood obesity has more than tripled in the past 30 years.”
Fourthly, a few links detailing how much (reported) diabetes there was in the past, and how quickly things have changed…
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/445672_6
http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/A_ffluent_D_iseases_52/110102302008_U_S_diabetes_rate_doubles_in_10_years.shtml
http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/51/12/3353.full
…interesting stuff.
So, what has changed over the years to bring about this disastrous epidemic?
1) Big-farmer, and even bigger big-supermarket, began promoting junk food by using fancy gimmicks and out-and-out lies. They made these new products taste wonderful so we couldn’t resist them, and made them much easier to use. Who wants to bother trying to spread good, wholesome butter when you can get easy-spread margarine made from nutritious(!) sunflower oil? They also bullied governments into letting them make false claims about the health benefits of their products; one such fraud was recently highlighted by our illustrious host: https://junkscience.com/2001/02/02/the-tail-end-of-the-fiber-myth/. Butter is back in fashion now, and eggs, as is the notion that fat (good fat) is actually good for you – essential even – but the damage has already been done.
2) As the increase in diabetes began to be noted in high places, big-pharma jumped in with any number of (scams) schemes to aid medical practitioners in their campaign to control the problem by basically pushing drugs and ignoring lifestyle and dietary considerations. Big-governments too played its part by telling everyone to keep stuffing in the carbs while cutting out the fat. This has recently begun to change but the damage has already been done.
3) Everyone got lazy. Blame the computer for our sedately lifestyle, blame politicians for forcing schools to teach children about AGW rather than have them do PE (physical education), blame parents for being too busy earning money to bother about the health of their children. Blame anyone, blame everyone; it doesn’t matter, the damage has been done.
4) The PC police took over the asylum. The attitude to obesity has changed markedly in just a few years. This is a link to a hit, UK tv show from the 1950s: http://www.whirligig-tv.co.uk/tv/children/bunter/bunter.htm. Fat kid stuffs his face all day and everyone makes fun of him. Can you imagine anything like that being produced today? Impossible.
Be honest; how many fat kids were at school with you? I went to school during the late 1950s and early 60s, and fat kids could be counted on one skinny hand; they were that rare. Now, the world is full of fat kids and no one is allowed to mention it unless it’s to say something like, “It’s not their fault; it’s their genes.”
Funny that, wouldn’t you say? We have the same genes everyone else has had for the last million years or so, and yet, suddenly, bad genes are the cause of an epidemic of diabetes in children, as well as an epidemic of obesity in the general population.
No matter that you have a propensity for diabetes, or a heart attack, or kidney failure, or breast cancer, or acne; what you stuff in your mouth matters. Diabetes is controllable, and even curable in certain cases, simply by taking responsibility for your lifestyle, and taking control of what you eat; ask my wife. This is her favourite website: http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/
As for everyone else? Houston, we have a problem:
http://www.diabetes.co.uk/news/2011/Jun/obese-americans-in-denial-about-their-health,-says-report-92553751.html
As for Christie? If he runs, he might be elected (George Bush could be re-elected at this moment in time), and I’ll bet anyone a Yankee dollar that his first presidential medical-result shows that he is diabetic.
They have to have Taft’s bathtub somewhere in the White House still. Heck, I bet every First Couple since has used it for their romantic nights in. Either way, it hasn’t been used for just one person since 1913.
Christie is unfit for the job for many reasons. His waistline isn’t one of them.
Pops, food does not make you diabetic. It is a genetic disease, as is gout and heart disease. Eating “healthy” food might make you feel superior, but does nothing for longevity or health. Nor does exercise mean anything except that you exercise.
And some people can eat fewer calories than they need to maintain their body weight, and still not lose weight. It is a lot more complicated than “calories in – calories out”. Bodies are not static, they are dynamic. Modern medicine is an art form, not a science.
Pops, don’t make be break out the JunkFoodScience links.
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2006/11/obesity-paradox-1.html
Whether he admits it or not (or even knows it) Christie is already, at minimum, a type 1 diabetic. He will be type 2 soon enough and therefore seriously ill. This is a basic fact of life as we now lead it – too many carbs (sugar) makes you fat and diabetic. Added to that, diabetes has been proven to diminish the victim’s neural processes.
http://www.naturalnews.com/027281_diabetes_sugar_blood.html
We (you) already have a severely debilitated president…
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/obamas_malignant_narcissism.html
…why vote for more of the same?
Fat is not the problem with Christie, The problem with Christie is his belief in Al Gore and the Global Warming HOAX.