Why do so many studies suggest obesity as an independent risk and why dieting is futile... |
|
As the New Year has arrived, the diet
industry is booming out its message - different ads but it's all same
i.e. "lose weight easily" (with their program).
A message which is being highly UNDER
emphasized in the media (they ARE all about selling something) is the fact
that this may just be the year we should discard dieting forever and
instead look to really BECOMING healthy by making better food choices
(i.e. no fast food, junk food or alcohol), getting rid of bad habits like
smoking and considering some type of cardio exercise.
In March 2005, the senior scientist at
the CDC announced that the figures on obesity deaths had been way over
estimated. The re-computed figures, Dr Kathleen Flegal stated, were
obesity related deaths were no more than 112,000. She also stated that
the CDC stats showed that people in the overweight and obese BMI's (26-35)
appeared to live longer than people at the so called "normal weights".
Since some 86,000 of the 112,000 so
called obesity deaths were at BMI 26-35, several scientists have suggested
that the real adjusted obesity death figure is a measily 26,000 per year.
But even if 112,000 per year, what
part did lifestyle factors take in these deaths i.e. poor diet and
sedentary lifestyle?
95 percent of the public does not
exercise enough to affect their weight and only 5 percent of the public
exercises 5 days a week or more.
Therefore, continued Flegal, the
connection between those 112,000 and obesity may be weak or non existent.
Interestingly enough, cancer kills a
half million people a year and smoking is directly related to 95 percent
of chronic lung disorder and 400,000 deaths a year.
But obesity seems most of what we hear
about in the news. I have known people in Weight Watchers who are leaders
and say constantly how they "got healthy" because they lost weight and
then, go out and have a cigarette during a break. Huh? What is wrong with
that picture?
So why you may ask are we told on a
daily basis how dangerous obesity is?
The simple answer is that selling
diets and medical solutions to obesity profits those involved over 40
BILLION dollars a year - that's enough of a reason to suppress the truth
about obesity right there.
And what IS that truth?
For one, to date obesity has NOT been
well proven as an independent risk factor for disease. In those studies
which suggest obesity IS a risk factor, fitness is not considered and
almost never are food choices considered. Books on de-coding studies tell
us that 95 percent of studies have a fatal flaw. Some studies use data
which is in existence already (scientists call these "data dredge"
studies) - data which has not been collected specifically FOR the study.
Obviously in these large data dredge studies, many factors, one of which
might change the result, are not available to the researchers.
One classic data dredge study in the
headlines for weeks was one conducted by Dr Hu et al out of Harvard
Medical School. The researchers concluded using an existent group of data
that being fit would not reduce risk if the person was fat. The problems
with that study (any one of which invalidates the result) are as follows:
Stephen Milloy, Fox News junk science journalist, had some interesting things to write about this study. Milloy wrote: >>>>> I don’t know whether fat-but-fit is a myth, but I do know that Hu’s study is extraordinarily dubious. Data on the women’s level of physical activity were collected at numerous points during the study (in 1980, 1982, 1988, 1992, 1996 and 1998). In contrast, the data on the women’s bodyweight were collected only once — by self-report in 1976. So Hu’s results are based on analyses of the women’s bodyweights in 1976 and their subsequent physical activity levels as much as 22 years later. Hu's myth-busting effort might have been on firmer ground had he showed, for example, that women who were consistently overweight but active throughout 1976-1998 had greater mortality than women who were consistently lean-and-fit throughout that time frame. Hu claims that the 1976 bodyweight data alone were used “to reduce the effects of underlying disease on weight” — whatever that means. He, therefore, admits possession of the bodyweight data for the period 1976-1998. I can only conclude that Hu chose to use the 1976 data alone because they gave him the myth-busting, headline-making answer he wanted. Many studies on obesity and disease use the so called risk factor numbers (c-reactive proteins, cholesterol, blood pressure etc) to judge health rather than really clinically examining the participants.
This ignores the fact that the so
called risk factor numbers, lower in someone fasting or dieting are ALSO
lower in terminal cancer patients and AIDS patients but one can certainly
NOT say that cancer and AIDS patients are under less risk of disease and
death. Numbers alone can be very misleading as we discovered through the
so called IQ problems in the 1930's - 1960's.
Researchers who do meta studies
(studies of current research) often eliminate the studies which suggest
the wrong thing so that the results of the study seem to prove what they
wish to prove. Kind of like the old "1 in 8 say this is a good product"
but what they don't tell you is how many they asked who gave the wrong
answer and were eliminated from the calculations.
Many studies on obesity are funded BY
the diet industry or pharmaceuticals selling diet pills. A study proving
obesity is risky funded by the diet industry reminds me of the fox
guarding the hen house.
As we have heard yet recently again,
it is a "standard practice" in the pharmaceutical industry to suppress
negative results. This practice actually RUINED the hearts of some folks
when bad results from the Bextra and Vioxx studies were withheld from the
general public.
But of course that's been done for
years.
For example in the Met Life build
studies in the 1970's, meant to tell us for once and for all, what was a
healthy weight (remember they produced the weight charts we used before
the era of BMI), their results were all over the board. At some ages, the
thinner folks lived longer but at other ages, it was the fatter ones who
survived better.
For example, at the age of 49, females
who were 5'4" most likely to be the healthiest, weighed over 190 lbs.
Met Life knew "the world" was waiting
for their results and since they basically HAD NO RESULTS i.e. could not
find a standard healthy weight, they took the most healthy weights at the
age of 20 and computed a new chart mathematically.
Finally, I have discovered individuals
who simply misread the studies so as to not disturb their agenda. One
individual I've had some discussions with, listened to the Rudy Leibel
speech on the powerful biochemical system which defends the highest weight
and all he got out of that speech was a half a sentence i.e. when Dr
Leibel stated that even a small weight loss like 10 lbs helped risk
factors. The other half of the sentence was "but most people cannot even
keep off a small loss". He totally missed where Dr Leibel stated that
there is NO weight loss program at present which is successful for most
people.
Finally, the whole diet industry is
predicated on selling us on the myth that most of us CAN lose weight and
keep it off. Science tells us something different. All studies show that
even the most clever weight loss programs like Weight Watchers over a 2
year period netted participants a measily 11 lb loss.
The studies also clearly tell us
that the lifestyle factors which have been shown to reduce risk i.e. good
food choices and exercise, apparently reduce risk whether you lose weight
or not.
Bottom line, only 5 percent of people
can keep off the weight they lose but 95 percent of people seem to think
they are in that 5 percent.
Why we cannot keep off weight is no
longer a mystery according to Dr Rudy Leibel whose excellent speech on the
strong biochemical system which kicks in forcing a re-gain has NEVER made
the news media.
He stated that "the system is set up
to defend bodyfat so if you monkey with it down here, all *ell breaks out
and the body goes haywire!"
He has discovered 4 hormones which the
body plays with to make people trying to keep a weight loss just not feel
well. He says there may be as many as 40 hormones involved.
From Dr Leibel's studies of formerly
obese (who are keeping weight off), he observed that they are hungry all
the time, are cold and other symptoms of the biochemical system kicking in
to force a weight gain. When they exercise, these individuals burn 15 to
20 percent LESS calories than a normally thin person and they evidence
large amounts of cortisol in the blood (the cortisol has been observed in
some studies to cause weight gain in and of itself).
And of course, dieting has been shown
to be a risky behavior, actually raising the CVD risk as much as 40
percent in people over 50 (even the news media agreed that people over 65
should NOT diet).
The Cooper Institute studies of 20,000
men and 9500 women and the HAES study of SC do give us an answer and that
is that people who exercise and eat healthy have a significantly less risk
of death and disease REGARDLESS of what they weigh (and the risk is about
the same for both normal weight and very fat).
> Lee CD, Blair SN, Jackson AS.
Cardiorespiratory fitness, body composition,
> and all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality in men. American > Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1999 Mar;69(3):373-80 > > > Normal, fit men: RR = 0.83 > Obese, fit men: RR = 0.90 > Lean, fit men: RR = 1.0 > Normal, unfit men: RR = 1.61 > Obese, unfit men: RR = 1.92 > Lean, unfit men: RR = 2.06
(any relative risk less than 2.0 is
considered insignificant. As you can see, the differential between fat men
who exercise and normal weight men who exercise was only 0.07)
There is also some evidence that being
heavier and having some adipose may be an advantage in a stronger immune
system and less osteoporosis. (see Glenn Gaesser's metastudy - cite below)
We are told that osteoarthritis is
greater in heavy people but I got a dose of reality when I saw a man I
have known for 25 years, who never had any fat on his body, 5 years
younger than I am, who is now, as stiff as a board while fat old me is
pretty agile.
Is there a risk to obesity? Maybe but
it has yet to be really proven.
So in 2006, throw out the scale and go
for the healthy way of life - and if you don't have the genetics to be in
that lucky 5 percent who can keep slim, celebrate the abilities you DO
have which are probably much more important than "looking slim" regardless
of what the Jenny Craig commercials tell us.
resources:
The following books have up to date
information on Obesity research
Campos, Paul: THE OBESITY MYTH,
(NY, 2003) or THE DIET MYTH (NY,2005)
Fraser, L., Losing It: America's Obsession with Weight and the Industry that Feeds on it, 1997, Dutton (New York) Gaesser, Glenn, PhD:Big Fat Lies, Fawcett (NY, 1996, CA, 2002) Colles, Lisa: Fat, Exploding the Myths, Carlton (London, 1998) Pool, Robert: FAT - exploring the obesity epidemic (NY, 2001)
Websites:
Dr Leibel's speech (highly recommended
listening!)
The problem with obesity studies by
Sandy Szwarc, BSN, RN
|