Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / May 2008
Do Obese People Aggravate Global Warming?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Skip Buffet - 21 May 2008 11:45 GMT "Researchers say obesity epidemic threatens environment, and an additional 250 million tons of greenhouse gases may be released every year to sustain an ever more obese population.The obesity experts condemned the letter in Lancet."
"The letter, submitted by researchers from the United Kingdom, implicates the rising tide of obesity in greater oil consumption, more food production -- and, ultimately, in an increase in the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
"It is a significant contribution," said Phil Edwards, co-author of the letter and senior statistician at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in the United Kingdom.
"Eighteen percent more food energy is required in many populations where there is a large prevalence of obesity," he said, citing a 460-calorie increase in daily food intake for an obese individual. "There is a clear impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions in order to grow that food."
Edwards and colleague Ian Roberts wrote in the letter that "more transportation fuel energy will be used to transport the increased mass of the obese population, which will increase even further if, as is likely, the overweight people in response to their increased body mass choose to walk less and drive more."
But more troubling, some said, was the stigma that could arise from the suggestion that those who are obese pose a greater environmental burden than their slimmer counterparts."
http://www.diabetesincontrol.com/results.php?storyarticle=5774
Chris Malcolm - 22 May 2008 11:24 GMT > But more troubling, some said, was the stigma that could arise from the > suggestion that those who are obese pose a greater environmental burden > than their slimmer counterparts." It's not specifically linked to obesity. The heavier you are the more of an environmental burden you are, regardless of whether you're heavier because you're fat, or because you're very muscular, or because you're very tall. Bigger people eat more and cost more fuel to move around.
I look forward to rational airline ticket pricing based on weighing the passengers as well as their baggage.
 Signature Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 22 May 2008 11:36 GMT > > But more troubling, some said, was the stigma that could arise from the > > suggestion that those who are obese pose a greater environmental burden [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I look forward to rational airline ticket pricing based on weighing > the passengers as well as their baggage. It still remains much smarter to eat less, down to the right amount.
Be hungry... be healthy... be hungrier... be euglycemic...
Marana tha
Prayerfully in the awesome name of LORD Jesus Christ,
Andrew <>< -- http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/3558812d72ab4e17?
Skip Buffet - 22 May 2008 16:04 GMT > It's not specifically linked to obesity. The heavier you are the more > of an environmental burden you are, regardless of whether you're > heavier because you're fat, or because you're very muscular, or > because you're very tall. Bigger people eat more and cost more fuel to > move around. "Eighteen percent more food energy is required in many populations where there is a large prevalence of obesity," he said, citing a 460-calorie increase in daily food intake for an obese individual. "There is a clear impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions in order to grow that food."
The study looked at the effect of obesity in the aggregate.
Let's make cycling safer!
Chris Malcolm - 23 May 2008 12:29 GMT >> It's not specifically linked to obesity. The heavier you are the more >> of an environmental burden you are, regardless of whether you're >> heavier because you're fat, or because you're very muscular, or >> because you're very tall. Bigger people eat more and cost more fuel to >> move around.
> "Eighteen percent more food energy is required in many populations where > there is a large prevalence of obesity," he said, citing a 460-calorie > increase in daily food intake for an obese individual. "There is a clear > impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions in order to grow that food."
> The study looked at the effect of obesity in the aggregate.
> Let's make cycling safer! I didn't think cycling was dangerous. According to the statistics I've seen it's no more dangerous than walking about in city streets, and a lot safer than walking up and down stairs or taking a bath. My personal experience seems to confirm that, in that I've had more accidents on staircases than bicycles in my last fifty years of cycling.
 Signature Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
Wes Groleau - 23 May 2008 19:16 GMT >> Let's make cycling safer! > > I didn't think cycling was dangerous. According to the statistics I've > seen it's no more dangerous than walking about in city streets, and a He didn't say it was dangerous, he just wants it safer. And I agree.
It's probably more dangerous in the USA than in Scotland. Many people here seem to make their driving an ego thing and resent anyone not conforming.
Many other people have a visual impairment that makes them unable to see anything not having four wheels and an exhaust pipe.
http://3rvs.com/joomla/Latest/Ride-of-Silence.html http://www.rideofsilence.org/
 Signature Wes Groleau
Is it an on-line compliment to call someone a Net Wit ?
Cheri - 23 May 2008 19:40 GMT Wes Groleau wrote in message ...
>>> Let's make cycling safer! >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Many people here seem to make their driving an ego thing >and resent anyone not conforming. And lots of those bike riders resent anyone who's driving and do what they can to interfere with the process, which causes many a dangerous situation too. It works both ways.
Cheri
Alan S - 23 May 2008 23:08 GMT >>It's probably more dangerous in the USA than in Scotland. >>Many people here seem to make their driving an ego thing [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Cheri Yep. There is idiocy on both sides. We had a recent nasty accident here where several riders were injured when a group of about 100 were out in peak-hour traffic on a highway. The driver should not have lost his cool and rammed his brakes on in front of them after an incident but it could be argued that common-sense would have led the riders to choose a different time and place for a mass ride. And no, they weren't riding home from work.
Here is an intersting comment on cycling to work in Sydney. http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/a-city-thats-hell-on-two-wheels/2008/05/15/12 10765054817.html
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. -- d&e, metformin 1500mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com Latest: Bangkok
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 24 May 2008 12:34 GMT > >>It's probably more dangerous in the USA than in Scotland. > >>Many people here seem to make their driving an ego thing [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Here is an intersting comment on cycling to work in Sydney. > http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/a-city-thats-hell-on-two-wheels/2008/05/15/12 10765054817.html "Love each other as I have loved you." -- LORD Jesus Christ
Amen.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/15fd908b7bd5e0cb
Be hungry... be healthy... be hungrier... be euglycemic...
Marana tha
Prayerfully in the awesome name of LORD Jesus Christ,
Andrew <>< -- http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/3558812d72ab4e17?
bj - 23 May 2008 20:36 GMT >>> Let's make cycling safer! >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Many people here seem to make their driving an ego thing > and resent anyone not conforming. Now if the cyclists around here would just stop trying to run down the pedestrians -- on the *sidewalk*! -- as well as on some popular multi-use trails in the area. Or at least do better calling-out "passing or running you down!"; rarely, one actually uses a bell.
They seem to have the attitude that "we're virtuously not driving, so we rule the universe." They're not always looking where they're going & don't always remember that there are people going in *both* directions -- they're just intent on getting by/through the ones in front of them they ignore people coming the other way. Sometimes they're in packs, which can be frightening if your choices are to dive in the bushes, a ditch, or the canal. I've had a few close calls but so far no collisions. bj (I'm the one on foot....)
Skip Buffet - 24 May 2008 13:58 GMT > They seem to have the attitude that "we're virtuously not driving, so we > rule the universe." They're not always looking where they're going & don't [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > bj > (I'm the one on foot....) All these complaints argue for better separation between autos and bikes. With these blasted behemoths on US roads, the TITANS, the ESCALADES, the ARMADAS, there's little incentive for a bike rider to do much street travel, especially when these overstuffed vehicles are on the road and parked on both sides, too.
As for the piggy bike riders passing pedestrians on the sidewalk...they should be calling out "ON YOUR LEFT" but they're too lazy. A bell would help, but that's not cool for the cool piggies.
Johnnie McCoy - 31 May 2008 05:17 GMT > Sometimes they're in packs, which can be > frightening if your choices are to dive in the bushes, a ditch, or the > canal. I've had a few close calls but so far no collisions. > bj > (I'm the one on foot....) It's hard to dive anywhere when you're doubled over laughing, uncontrollably, at grown men in skin tight clown suits -:)
John
Chris Hogg - 27 May 2008 08:26 GMT >> It's not specifically linked to obesity. The heavier you are the more >> of an environmental burden you are, regardless of whether you're [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Let's make cycling safer! I suspect a similar study would show that athletes and others indulging in high-energy activities also contribute to global warming. Obviously we should all become couch-potatoes on minimal diets. Is that stupid, or what?
 Signature Chris
T2 DX'd 2002, D&E, HbA1c 5.7,BMI 21 Lipids:Tot 4.2 HDL 1.4 LDL 2.5 Tri 0.6
E-mail: christopher[dot]hogg[at]virgin[dot]net
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 27 May 2008 09:34 GMT > <Skip@nospam.com> wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Obviously we should all become couch-potatoes on minimal diets. Is > that stupid, or what? Those who are eating the right amount and are doing the right things are not needlessly contributing to global warming.
Truth is simple.
May you and other dear neighbors, friends, and brethren have a blessedly wonderful 2008th year since the birth of our LORD Jesus Christ as the Son of Man ...
... by being hungrier:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f891e617d10bd689?
Hunger is wonderful ! ! !
It's how we know what GOD desires, which is all that is good.
Yes, hunger is our knowledge of good versus evil that Adam and Eve paid for with their and our immortal lives.
"Blessed are you who hunger NOW...
... for you will be satisfied." -- LORD Jesus Christ (Luke 6:21)
Amen.
Here is a Spirit-guided exegesis of Luke 6:21 given in hopes of promoting much greater understanding:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/cc2aa8f8a4d41360?
Be hungry... be healthy... be hungrier... be euglycemic...
Marana tha
Prayerfully in the awesome name of LORD Jesus Christ,
Andrew <>< -- http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/3558812d72ab4e17?
|
|
|