General Discussion

KurtNYC

(14,549 posts)

35. But Flegel has been debunked for her flawed methodology

Wed Mar 20, 2013, 04:10 PM

Mar 2013

But, the crux of the problem with the CDC study, according to several panelists, was failure to control for "reverse causality," a theme that was echoed by several panelists. Implicit in the study's methodology was the notion that leanness can lead to death, when in fact, leanness may merely be an adverse effect of the sickness that leads to death.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/505703

Someone who claims to know science as well as you do should know the difference between correlation and causation and yet you just confused the two: Being Overweight (which is above "ideal" and less than "obese&quot results in 6% reduced mortality.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

94 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sugar, not fat, exposed as deadly villain in obesity epidemic [View all] alp227 Mar 2013 OP

Dr Robert Atkins Purplehazed Mar 2013 #1

Absolutely. Actually our bodies need fat. Two days ago I watched snappyturtle Mar 2013 #7

So... RobinA Mar 2013 #75

Well, basically "yes" but it was stressed in "Fat Head" that Mc D's is not snappyturtle Mar 2013 #81

Gotta love the Atkins diet: Cali_Democrat Mar 2013 #24

But not the English Muffin! DanTex Mar 2013 #38

True Cali_Democrat Mar 2013 #63

Note that although "Supersize Me" blamed fat for American's health problems Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #46

Gross. Neoma Mar 2013 #72

His high protein Dorian Gray Mar 2013 #90

It is a common belief... Purplehazed Mar 2013 #93

Yep, a common myth by people who haven't read Atkins laundry_queen Mar 2013 #94

What a load of garbage. There no "epidemic" of "obesity" whatever that is. duffyduff Mar 2013 #2

You are mistaken. Both weight and body mass index of Americans has been on a long upward trend. slackmaster Mar 2013 #4

The problem is the science behind saying this is a problem isn't quite as settled as people believe. jeff47 Mar 2013 #9

I agree that the problem tends to be overstated, and so is the risk of "bad" cholesterol numbers. slackmaster Mar 2013 #11

High BMI correlates with REDUCED life spans. KurtNYC Mar 2013 #12

You may want to google the technical terms so you understand what you're talking about. jeff47 Mar 2013 #13

That seems more like an indication of how worthless BMI charts are than anything else. Marr Mar 2013 #17

Potentially. The point is we don't know because there has not been sufficient study. jeff47 Mar 2013 #18

But You Can't Do a Study RobinA Mar 2013 #78

But Flegel has been debunked for her flawed methodology KurtNYC Mar 2013 #35

No, that's a desperate attempt to protect the un-studied status-quo jeff47 Mar 2013 #71

This graph is adieu Mar 2013 #29

The legend didn't come through. Thanks for pointing that out. Link to source page... slackmaster Mar 2013 #53

Interesting. What happened in 1980 to explain the sudden increase? mainer Mar 2013 #56

I would guess that an increase in use of HFCS occurred, or maybe people reduced cocaine consumption slackmaster Mar 2013 #59

Ah, looked it up. HCFS introduced in foods between 1975 and 1985 mainer Mar 2013 #60

My Guess RobinA Mar 2013 #79

Any Indication RobinA Mar 2013 #77

you are incorrect shanti Mar 2013 #6

Definitions. Were. Changed. RobinA Mar 2013 #80

You should make that an OP Cali_Democrat Mar 2013 #23

Boy, you are so wrong adieu Mar 2013 #26

Sugar is not sugar. RC Mar 2013 #34

Sugar is a toxin and we as a nation are obese MattBaggins Mar 2013 #37

Your brain needs that "toxin" to function. In other words to sustain marybourg Mar 2013 #45

Not hyperbolic at all MattBaggins Mar 2013 #67

The human body can produce any sugar it requires madville Mar 2013 #84

That's exactly what I said, but I was pointing out marybourg Mar 2013 #85

It might be more correct to say madville Mar 2013 #86

Maybe the word "toxic" should just be dropped and we can marybourg Mar 2013 #87

I have old school pictures from the 1950s and 1960s Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #47

Unfortunately, you are wrong. Avalux Mar 2013 #61

I disagree - there is an "epidemic" elfin Mar 2013 #66

It's not as if you eat fat and your body takes it in directly Recursion Mar 2013 #3

yes, he is correct shanti Mar 2013 #5

I think you mean the simple carbs, right? redqueen Mar 2013 #8

Complex and refined carbs are different things jeff47 Mar 2013 #10

We have medical deniers on the left, like the climate deniers on the right... Generation_Why Mar 2013 #14

The problem is there are no facts here. jeff47 Mar 2013 #19

But that's how science works adieu Mar 2013 #28

The problem is acting as if the study is complete as soon as the hypothesis has been made. jeff47 Mar 2013 #32

No one made that claim except you adieu Mar 2013 #36

In my childhood, a long time ago, people seemed to know marybourg Mar 2013 #50

People aren't eating mountains of candy, cake or pie jeff47 Mar 2013 #70

it is in everything marions ghost Mar 2013 #88

It is highly refined and processesd carbs in general supernova Mar 2013 #15

The study of sugar spikes is complicated by the fact that few items are hedgehog Mar 2013 #41

It's not the fat supernova Mar 2013 #57

I've started cooking with my grandmother and saving her recipes NickB79 Mar 2013 #16

I was going to say -- that kind of cooking/eating went along well with farm labor. Arugula Latte Mar 2013 #21

Overeating is the culprit. RedCappedBandit Mar 2013 #20

Absolutely!!! It's all about portion size. Happyhippychick Mar 2013 #25

Both portion size and contents of portion - hedgehog Mar 2013 #40

Nothing wrong with a cup of ice cream. RedCappedBandit Mar 2013 #68

Indispensable Fact Sophiegirl Mar 2013 #22

There seems to be a sentiment in Middle America that a "good" restaurant is one where Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #64

Like any of this is news or new science? Yawn. xtraxritical Mar 2013 #27

Bacon rejoices. n/t TygrBright Mar 2013 #30

As do I n/t flying rabbit Mar 2013 #69

people have short memories. HiPointDem Mar 2013 #31

HFCS. nt Javaman Mar 2013 #33

Beat me to it derby378 Mar 2013 #39

Rec Javaman's post. It's the HFCS, not just "sugar." Ilsa Mar 2013 #42

I don't know if it effects the brain differently, but at the very least, hedgehog Mar 2013 #48

About five years ago, Ilsa Mar 2013 #52

Yup, what HFCS effects are the lipids in you system. Javaman Mar 2013 #62

I honestly believe that people are gaining weight for multiple reasons: hedgehog Mar 2013 #43

simpler than that: nutrition. Javaman Mar 2013 #55

"...not a case of eradicating sugar... just getting it down to LEVELS that are not toxic" Silent3 Mar 2013 #44

I began limiting sugar about 15 years ago Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #49

Sugar and HFCS are not the same. Where is the study on HFCS? Autumn Mar 2013 #51

Of course it's BS... Javaman Mar 2013 #58

I think you are correct on each point you made. Autumn Mar 2013 #65

This should not be news to anyone. ananda Mar 2013 #54

Duh. Ever read the label on "fat free" so-called "yogurt"? Hekate Mar 2013 #73

The ones that creep me out are "fat-free sour cream" and "fat-free whipping cream" Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #74

Duh! Atkins was right. Fat is good. Sugar is bad. n/t Laelth Mar 2013 #76

I think it's a mistake to pipi_k Mar 2013 #82

Sugar is part of the problem. Carbs and Wheat (the super carb) are very much to blame theophilus Mar 2013 #83

Too much sugar Dorian Gray Mar 2013 #89

My doc.... Bigmack Mar 2013 #91

See why. sendero Mar 2013 #92