Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fat People Cause Global Warming, Higher Food Prices

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the opening-an-extra-size-can-of-worms dept.

Earth 1083

Stating the obvious: "Two scientists write that obese people are disproportionately responsible for high food prices and greenhouse gas emissions because they consume 18% more food energy due to their greater body mass -- and require increased quantities of fuel to transport themselves and the food they eat. 'Promotion of a normal distribution of BMI would reduce the global demand for, and thus the price of, food,' write the authors, Phil Edwards and Ian Roberts of the evocatively named London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine."

cancel ×

1083 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (5, Funny)

RM6f9 (825298) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448082)

Weighing more makes us harder for the aliens to suck out of our cars, the reserves mean we'll last longer in the coming famine years, and if any skinny little vegans give us any lip, all we gotta do is sit on 'em to quash the noise...
Seriously, extreme obesity is a darwin rule in action, usually - nobody wants to breed with us, and heart disease/stroke usually kill us "early" - rather like gay marriage, if you don't like 'em, don't join 'em, otherwise, back off: It's hard enough living in a world that wasn't built for us without having some smug, self-righteous ass-hat making comments because, while normal, we don't fit average... only made the worse when it's people who want their particular outside-of-average needs respected who fail the tolerance test...

Hey... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448142)

How'd you get to reply so fast?

Re:Hey... (4, Funny)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448194)

He's skinny... better mobility...

Corn (5, Informative)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448244)

Corn? Yes, Corn!

Michael Pollan will convince you, [michaelpollan.com] that this is no accident. You are eating nothing but corn - with a four-carbon configuration that is destroying your healt and nutrition, as it wrecks ecosystems in its cultivation.

Thanks, Cargill! Thanks, Mosanto! If Chevron-Texaco is Emperor Palpatine, these two are Darth Vader and Tarkin.

Re:Corn (5, Informative)

colourmyeyes (1028804) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448276)

I read "In Defense of Food" recently; it was very interesting. Since reading that, I see High Fructose Corn Syrup EVERYWHERE.

Also, we're not eating just corn - there is an awful lot of soy in there too. But yeah, we eat way too much corn.

Re:Corn (0, Flamebait)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448278)

Geezus... yer so 1337 that they hadn't even developed the second 3 yet...

Re:Corn (3, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448446)

You know? After all this time, I hadn't noticed this! Thanks.

Re:Corn (0, Offtopic)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448506)

(gentooflects)

Re:Hey... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448210)

How'd you get to reply so fast?
He's a fat fuck, so he stays on the computer at all times. No real life except posting to Slashdot.

How pathetic.

Re:Hey... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448234)

It's because he's fat. Everyone kowtows to fatties so they don't hurt their feelings.

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448202)

But when it comes to global warming then it isn't a case of "if you don't like 'em dont join 'em", it's a case of you're killing us all you fat bastards. At least partly. Stop acting like what you do doesn't affect anyone else. The entire point of the study is to disprove such bullshit.

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (4, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448270)

I agree. Plus, when we run out of oil, we can burn them for heat, and they'll burn far longer than skinny people. Plus, when we have to resort to cannibalism, they'll taste better than their skinny and athletic counterparts, who will be tough and gamy. And, they will be far easier to hunt, as they will move slowly and tire quickly.

In conclusion, we should not be trying to eliminate obesity. Rather, we should establish "fat farms" where we can increase their numbers for our future needs.

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (5, Insightful)

davester666 (731373) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448492)

"In conclusion, we should not be trying to eliminate obesity. Rather, we should establish "fat farms" where we can increase their numbers for our future needs."

Welcome to America. What would you like to eat?

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (5, Funny)

slarrg (931336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448380)

I agree! It's those damn breeders and their children that really consume resources. ;)

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (5, Informative)

Sancho (17056) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448424)

Seriously, extreme obesity is a darwin rule in action, usually
That's an interesting take on it, since we've basically evolved to eat when we can (when food is available) so that we can survive during leaner times.

nobody wants to breed with us
People tend to get obese later in life, but this might apply to a small number of people in prime breeding age.

heart disease/stroke usually kill us "early"
Oh, so you don't really understand Darwinism. Unless you get heart disease or have a stroke before you hit sexual maturity, this is irrelevant. For almost everyone--even the obese--health complications don't get extreme enough to kill you with a high statistical probability until you're well past your sexual prime, and getting there is all that Darwinism cares about.

[everything else]
Well, the point isn't that people are making smug comments. The point is that if you're eating more because you require more energy to carry an extra 50 or so pounds, then you're consuming more of a limited resource than everyone else. It's not like he's saying, "Man you fat people are ugly!"

And full disclosure--I'm about 50 pounds overweight. I've been working on this for a number of reasons--health, comfort, and the ability to bike to work instead of having to drive my car (those fill ups at the gas tank are starting to hurt.)

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (0, Flamebait)

JamesP (688957) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448500)

Oh, so you don't really understand Darwinism. Unless you get heart disease or have a stroke before you hit sexual maturity, this is irrelevant.

Actually, it matters a lot.

If your arteries are clogged, it is harder to get it up. It is harder to have a uneventful pregnancy, etc, etc

All of that gets in the 'darwin chain'

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (1)

drosboro (1046516) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448502)

Oh, so you don't really understand Darwinism. Unless you get heart disease or have a stroke before you hit sexual maturity, this is irrelevant. For almost everyone--even the obese--health complications don't get extreme enough to kill you with a high statistical probability until you're well past your sexual prime, and getting there is all that Darwinism cares about.
Actually, that's not quite right. Just so long as the heart attack or stroke happens WHILE he's able to reproduce, it DOES affect his "fitness". For females, anything that kills them before menopause is relevant. For males, fertility lasts significantly longer. Granted, the later in life heart attack or stroke occur, the less the effect is, but it should be statistically significant over a large enough population.

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448576)

There is probably also a grandfather effect, where being backed up by the productivity of a male working into his 60's makes you better off than you would be without such.

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (1, Funny)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448536)

Keep your hands off my chips you fat fuck.

Re:And on the plus side. of plus-size.. (1)

tuxgeek (872962) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448546)

and if any skinny little vegans give us any lip, all we gotta do is sit on 'em to quash the noise...
Whoa there jumbo, us skinny little vegans are quick on our feet. You'll have to diet and exercise if want to get fast enough to plop your lard ass on us.

We accept your apology d:-/

Mixed Causes (5, Insightful)

bhiestand (157373) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448150)

Although it was quite funny, it's a straw man and the study itself has some serious flaws. Some people really do have serious glandular problems or diseases causing obesity. My cousin was a beautiful young woman until she developed lupus... she went from somewhere around 120 pounds to, well, I'm not going to speculate. I'm not sure what exactly caused the obesity, it could have been anything from hormonal changes to medications she had to take, but I know her house isn't exactly filled with twinkies. I feel terrible walking around with her in public. Not because I'm embarrassed to be with an obese woman, but because I get so upset at the looks people give us. People look at her like she just killed and ate their favorite pet, then they look at me with a slightly different look of disgust.

In addition, I feel that while this may be accurate, we'd be pushing the environmentalism too far to cite it as a reason for people to lose weight. Even if it would save some energy, fuel, and materials, all of the savings are overshadowed by the significant social and medical advantages. If we could waste just a little more food and fuel to ensure a longer life expectancy, we would.

Of course, this study isn't really very good. While the global demand for food would likely drop, you'd have a significant jump in energy and oil prices. All of the formerly obese Americans, spending hundreds less on food every month, would be ready to hit the beaches, ski slopes, etc. with their extra money and less embarrassing bodies.

Finally, BMI is a shoddy system that I'm sick of seeing. BMI was developed at a time when leeching was an accepted medical practice, and hasn't changed significantly since then. BMI can not differentiate between lean mass and lard. This means that a society of body builders would have the same average BMI as a society of, well, lazy Americans.

Getting back to serious topics, it's very important to note that global food shortages (and corresponding rises in prices) are not caused by increased demand. They're caused by reduced supply, which has been, in part, caused by food aid programs [inthesetimes.com] . When people become dependent on food aid programs, a small series of events can raise food prices enough that food aid programs can't afford to send food [cnn.com] . You can imagine how well this works out for impoverished areas that have lost their indigenous food production capability.

Re:Mixed Causes (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448188)

Some people really do have serious glandular problems or diseases causing obesity
...and some people just like pies.

Re:Mixed Causes (2, Informative)

russotto (537200) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448228)

Finally, BMI is a shoddy system that I'm sick of seeing. BMI was developed at a time when leeching was an accepted medical practice, and hasn't changed significantly since then.

Leeching is STILL an accepted medical practice. They just use cleaner leeches now. BMI is still BS though.

Getting back to serious topics, it's very important to note that global food shortages (and corresponding rises in prices) are not caused by increased demand.

Right, they are caused by an unholy alliance of environmentalists and agricultural products companies, supporting biofuels.

Re:Mixed Causes (4, Interesting)

GregPK (991973) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448236)

I agree with you. I've got a large build with a low body fat. Viking build I guess, anyways I fit into 36 inch pants comfortably. I'm 6 foot 2 and my weight is still down 25 lbs from high school body building days leaving me at 245 lbs. I'm considered obese in the eyes of the insurance companies even though I have a six pack for muscle. I have to go through this long ass appeal process and physical in order to prove how lean I am every year.

Re:Mixed Causes (2, Informative)

Oligonicella (659917) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448458)

Same here. When I was running a stunt show, I had a physical. I sat there with my shirt off and the doctor in all seriousness told me I should lose 40 pounds. I looked down and asked "Where?" He was at a loss, of course. BMI is stupid.

For rusotto above. The leeching he's referring to is where they use leeches to drain blood because there's too much, not to reduce specific swellings.

Re:Mixed Causes (5, Funny)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448574)

BMI needs to be replaced by RWI or residual wobble index. In this, the doctor attaches accelerometers to your body and then rocks you from side to side and then measures how long your flabby belly continues to jiggle after he stops.

Re:Mixed Causes (0)

cozziewozzie (344246) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448512)

I'm even worse.

I have an extremely fast metabolism, and do sports 3-5 times a week. I can't sit still for more than a minute.

I have a very skinny build, but due to a relatively heavy frame, I weigh 93kg on 185cm. I'm obese according to any old-fashioned "metric". Yet, I'm skinny.

You wouldn't BELIEVE how much I eat. Yet I'm skinny.

Re:Mixed Causes (1)

GregPK (991973) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448248)

Also, I have friends who are required to take steroids for asthma. They eat about 1/4 what I do but they still balloon up and look fat. Steroids are killers when it comes to looking big or not.

Re:Mixed Causes (0, Offtopic)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448280)

Although it was quite funny, it's a straw man and the study itself has some serious flaws.
The writers might be thin as straw, but the subjects definitely weren't.

Re:Mixed Causes (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448286)

Some people really do have serious glandular problems or diseases causing obesity.
This is about 0.1% of obese people. People are fat because they eat too much and exercise too little. Very, very, very few are fat for any other reason.

Re:Mixed Causes (0, Flamebait)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448294)

Finally, BMI is a shoddy system that I'm sick of seeing. BMI was developed at a time when leeching was an accepted medical practice, and hasn't changed significantly since then. BMI can not differentiate between lean mass and lard. This means that a society of body builders would have the same average BMI as a society of, well, lazy Americans.
When we start seeing the number of body builders outweigh the flabbers, then we'll review BMI. Until then it remains a useful tool because everybody understands it and it has been validated.

Re:Mixed Causes (2, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448394)

Although it was quite funny, it's a straw man and...


unfortunately, according to the codified laws of debate, chapter 5, subsection 32, the charge of "straw man" is an applicable rhetorical device in any disagreement, except in the instance of arguing about a fat man. you will have to rephrase

Re:Mixed Causes (2, Informative)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448420)

Getting back to serious topics, it's very important to note that global food shortages (and corresponding rises in prices) are not caused by increased demand...
Not quite true. It is both increased demand and shorter supply. In particular, the growing middle class in both India and China are eating more meat. ( And it takes 2 to 4 pounds of grain to produce a pound of chicken; about 10 pounds of grain to produce a pound of pork, and 15-20 pounds of grain to produce a pound of beef ) So they are increasing the demand for both grain and meat.
The decrease in supply is due to several factors: Australia is in its 6th year of drought, Argentina has had floods, and American farmers are 20% of their corn into producing fuel ethanol.

Re:Mixed Causes (1)

cozziewozzie (344246) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448538)

A friend of mine studying development studies cited a statistic that we produce enough food to feed the world two times over.

There's plenty of food, only it rots on the shelves of huge supermarket chains while people elsewhere is starving.

It's not even a logistic problem. It's simply a case of being spoilt.

Re:Mixed Causes (1)

urcreepyneighbor (1171755) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448530)

In addition, I feel that while this may be accurate, we'd be pushing the environmentalism too far to cite it as a reason for people to lose weight.
How about another reason?

When we have to resort to cannibalism [ajc.com] to survive, the fatties will be hunted. Get in shape now and, instead of being hunted, you can be a hunter!

Nothing will impress a chic in the not-too-distant future than a man that can bag a family of fatties in an SUV!

Mm-mm, good!

Re:Mixed Causes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448586)

Although it was quite funny, it's a straw man and the study itself has some serious flaws. Some people really do have serious glandular problems or diseases causing obesity.
these unfortunate people are by far and away the minority of obese people. My mother is a gargantuan fat-ass and she has no-one to blame but herself even tho she tries to blame her underactive thyroid gland, which I think just gave up because she was eating more butter than any amount of thyroid hormone could ever hope to burn off.

Or, maybe, they should worry about themselves (4, Interesting)

OMNIpotusCOM (1230884) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448164)

I wonder how many greenhouse gasses were released in the creation of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, the webhosting of the LA Times (let alone creation and physical distribution of the papers), or why they accepted 2 million dollars [wikipedia.org] from the Rockefeller foundation [wikipedia.org] . We all know that John D Rockefeller [wikipedia.org] was very green while he was revolutionizing the petroleum industry and founding Standard Oil. Maybe while the school looks...

To contribute to the improvement of health worldwide through the pursuit of excellence in research, postgraduate teaching and advanced training in national and international public health and tropical medicine, and through informing policy and practice in these areas.
...they should remember where they came from and why they have the buildings they do. Instead of spouting nonsense that will make less people want to visit, they should actually work on something that matters.

Re:Or, maybe, they should worry about themselves (1)

hxnwix (652290) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448510)

they accepted 2 million dollars [wikipedia.org] from the Rockefeller foundation...they should remember where they came from and why they have the buildings they do.
Have some respect. The Rockefeller Foundation isn't some arm of big oil intent on encouraging petroleum use. They tend to support the social and medical sciences in addition to crop development for expanding agricultural production worldwide [biotech-info.net] .

Instead of spouting nonsense that will make less people want to visit, they should actually work on something that matters.
From the summary: 'Promotion of a normal distribution of BMI would reduce the global demand for, and thus the price of, food.'

Sorry, the high price of food matters. Please turn in your Slashdot license and clean out your account. You fail.

Re:Or, maybe, they should worry about themselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448616)

Or, maybe, you could lose some fucking weight.

No matter how you slice it, fat people will always require more energy to be moved. Moving a 300lbs person will ALWAYS take more energy than moving a 150lbs person. And since fat people are much more likely to motor around or take lifts than fit people (since taking stairs and walking is a form of exercise), they use more of energy moving around each day than a fit person even ignoring body mass.

And while I do feel sorry for the 0.0001% of the population who are fat from disease or genuine genetic defect, the remaining 99.9999% are fat because they simply over eat and under exercise. Personally I support laws that would make it illegal for places that sell food to sell to the obese. Make the obese get food through nutritionists so that they'll stop wasting fit people's resources.

And higher porn prices (0, Offtopic)

Devout_IPUite (1284636) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448198)

That and they increase the price of porn due to lower supply of hot gals to enlist in the industry.

Re:And higher porn prices (1)

TheDeivix (1090291) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448260)

Ha ha ha... true, but think about this: if skinny and fit were the average then people would consider fat to be "hot", then chubby ladies would be in high demand by the industry.

In order to be considered beautiful things have to be uncommon too.

Re:And higher porn prices (1)

Devout_IPUite (1284636) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448292)

Hmmm... I know that what you're saying is sometimes true. In regions where food is scare, obesity indicates wealth and is attractive. Once you get past the starving hunger it seems like being skinny becomes more alluring. I suppose it's just that the girls are hotter on the other side of the fence.

Not normal? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448206)

Promotion of a normal distribution of BMI would reduce the global demand for, and thus the price of, food
Experience and the Central Limit Theorem tell me that they are distributed normally.

It evens out (1, Funny)

Eudial (590661) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448208)

Way I see it, things even out pretty nicely: Fat people are disproportionately unlikely to get laid, and therefore don't contribute to overpopulation.

Fat People Are Breeding (3, Insightful)

stuntmanmike (1289094) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448282)

Fat people are disproportionately unlikely to get laid, and therefore don't contribute to overpopulation.
Nope.

There will always be skinny guys who like to fuck fat chicks, fat guys who are rich enough that skinny girls will fuck them, and fat guys who eventually give up on their dreams of banging supermodels and settle for a fat chick.

Re:It evens out (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448288)

Yeah, but people get hella-fat AFTER they have kids generally, so they've doubly screwed the rest of us.

Re:It evens out (1)

urcreepyneighbor (1171755) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448454)

Fat people are disproportionately unlikely to get laid,
I had more women when I was a lardass. :(

While that may be Funny (1)

capnkr (1153623) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448470)

It's funny because there is some truth in it - regarding the root cause behind *all* of the environmental issues facing humans. IMO, a comment by "Walter" @ the LA Times page said it pretty succinctly:

Cute notion but as off the mark as every other cause...the only issue that is never seriously addressed is the only issue that really needs to be; this planet is severely over-populated. Every 'serious global problem' is simply a result of this fundamental fact. Good luck reconciling ever increasing population with rapidly dwindling resources. Be fruitful, dummy...multiply.
Posted by: Walter | May 17, 2008 at 10:06 AM

Disclaimer: I'm not "Walter", and I don't even play him on teh internets.

It gets said even better in Ishmael [wikipedia.org] , a novel by Daniel Quinn. Great book.

Ooooh! (4, Funny)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448222)

Does this mean I'm finally in a class that the government is going to throw money at?

Oh, and I plan to live 20% fewer years than average, so it's really a 2% gain for the planet.

-Peter

Re:Ooooh! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448330)

Its actually a 5.6% gain, since in that 20% you would have been eating 18% more food than most people...

1 - 1.18*(1-.2) = 0.056

Re:Ooooh! (1)

slarrg (931336) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448366)

Really! It's those damn breeders and their children that really consume resources. ;)

Doesn't that also apply to taller people? (0, Offtopic)

Zaatxe (939368) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448226)

No, I didn't read the article. But if that applies to taller people too, I'm happy for being just 1.66m (5'5" for americans) tall!

Re:Doesn't that also apply to taller people? (1)

jcgf (688310) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448400)

No, we just have to worry about foot/extremity problems, Marfan's Syndrome, low blood pressure and people asking how tall you are all the time.

Why are peopel tip toeing around this story? (5, Interesting)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448230)

Seems logical that obese people are disproportionately using up some resources. In the same way that professional racers are disproportionately using up carbon based fuels. I have seen really fat person it, and as a fatty myself, some scare me. But back to the story, seems like a logical corolation to me, very few obese people are fat and not eating much food.

Re:Why are people tip toeing around this story? (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448398)

As you may have noticed, I can't detect spelling errors very well, my apologies.

On the Flip Side (4, Insightful)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448408)

But back to the story, seems like a logical corolation to me, very few obese people are fat and not eating much food.

Yeah, but think about all the resources they're not:
  • Not buying new clothing every year to stay in fashion?
  • Not hotrodding on a Jet Ski at the lake?
  • Taking up and paying for two seats on the plane but only getting one skimpy rubbery meal?
  • Keeping the heat at 60 in the winter?
  • Not burning fuel to go to the movies because HBO is so much more comfortable?
  • Not flying in grapes from Chile to feed a winter-time vegetarian ethos when fried wheat do just fine?
Hey, I'm not advocating it, but let's have a full accounting here. Oh, right, that's really hard and there's less opportunity to be priggish. Sort of like me not reading TFA.

Re:Why are peopel tip toeing around this story? (1, Troll)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448508)

And fat people are disproportionately likely to watch NASCAR. Solution? Poison donuts at the next NASCAR race!

Because it's Slashdot! (1)

snikulin (889460) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448548)

All those Doritos and Coke over keyboard in parents' basement really add up to the average ./-er's waistline.

Ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448256)

Why does everyone always pick on the fat kid?

Re:Ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448450)

Because if he gets mad and chases you, he can't catch you.

Not all fat people eat more. (4, Insightful)

porcupine8 (816071) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448266)

A skinny person with a really high metabolism can eat far more in a day than a fat person with a slow one. Plus, you only need to eat a lot to *get* fat - maintaining your weight doesn't require eating extra. Not to mention tall people, teenaged boys, people with very physical jobs, and many others who would all eat more than an average person.

I'm not all pro-obesity or anything, but it's just silly to think that ALL obese people eat more than ALL average-weight people.

Re:Not all fat people eat more. (3, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448352)

A skinny person with a really high metabolism can eat far more in a day than a fat person with a slow one

Yes. On rare occasions you meet such people. I've known an ex-New York City Ballet dancer like that. She's slim, hard-muscled, radiates heat, and has to eat almost constantly to keep her weight up. I know an endurance rider who's 6' tall, all leg, runs seven miles a day, and eats twice what I do when we have dinner together. She thinks 58F is a good indoor temperature.

Such people are unusual. On the other hand, I've probably seen over fifty oinkers today, waddling around. And it's early yet.

Re:Not all fat people eat more. (0, Troll)

stubear (130454) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448406)

How do you draw the conclusion that the two people you know who have high metabolisms means that it's uncommon, in fact unusual? Why, oh why do so many slashbots keep thinking that anecdotal evidence somehow means anything statistically? Also, of the fifty "oinkers" how many did you see stuffing themselves silly? Don't bother answering that because this is the internet and you can say anything you want without having to prove it; the question was really rhetorical and meant to get others thinking about the line of bullshit you're trying to offer as evidence tat the GP's comments are somehow ridiculous.

Re:Not all fat people eat more. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448410)

Such people are not as rare as you think. Bodybuilding is increasingly popular. Muscle cells are known to have much higher maintenance requirements than other cells, especially compared to fat cells, and a study could just as well single out well-muscled people for similar scapegoating.

Re:Not all fat people eat more. (1)

porcupine8 (816071) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448466)

On the other hand, I've probably seen over fifty oinkers today, waddling around.

And do you know the current eating habits of any of those oinkers?

Re:Not all fat people eat more. (5, Informative)

cozziewozzie (344246) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448580)

Not quite.

Muscle uses a lot of energy. People with a muscular build NEED a lot more food than fat people, because fat doesn't consume energy, muscles do.

Add to this the fact that muscular people probably got that muscle through regular exercise, which burns lots of energy too.

Obesity is very often a case of bad diet (eating the wrong stuff) and non-balanced lifestyle (no exercise to match the food), and not simply eating too much. Athletes eat FAR more than your average fatty.

Re:Not all fat people eat more. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448382)

"Plus, you only need to eat a lot to *get* fat - maintaining your weight doesn't require eating extra."

Of course it does -- your body needs to keep a larger mass alive and at body temperature, which requires more energy. The article explicitly mentions that too.

Gut Bacteria (2, Insightful)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448448)

A skinny person with a really high metabolism

There's current thinking that different varieties of gut bacteria play a huge role here. Apparently some types can metabolize more types of food than others. The trick is the higher caloric content generated doesn't properly feed back into the hunger satiety mechanism, so the average person with highly efficient bacteria will tend to gain weight.

So, either fill up skinny people with more efficient bacteria and figure out how to deal with the hunger problem, or fill up fat people with the less efficient bacteria, but have to produce more food. Hey, there's a novel approach for anti-global-warming funding!

Re:Not all fat people eat more. (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448476)

Plus, you only need to eat a lot to *get* fat - maintaining your weight doesn't require eating extra.

Actually, it does. Larger fat cells, more skin, and more body mass in general, it's all alive and it requires a proportionally larger amount of energy to maintain. Obese people have serious cooling issues in the heat also, "sweatin' like a pig" burns a LOT of energy.

Then there's the whole issue of just getting around. An obese person may burn 30% more calories walking from their car to their house than you do, and this makes them require more energy intake on a daily basis. There's a reason fat people get winded walking up a few flights of stairs, they're burning through those twinkies at an astonishing rate.

There are those with medical reasons for being obese, but for the great majority, it's either a choice or a mental issue. (unless you want to classify mental issue as medical)

What really kills me is (A) the people that go in for that "carve the fat out of your body" surgery ("bariatric surgery", iirc?) and (B) the people that get their stomach stapled, and then wind up in the hospital because they gorged and burst their staples. All the surgery in the world can't solve mental causes of obesity.

Sorry for the OT, getting back to the point... you can't look at someone that's obese eating a larger dinner than you and scoff at them for not trying. Their 2,000 calorie meal compared to your 1,700 calorie meal, if you put it in perspective, they may be on a better diet than you are. Any dietitian will tell you that eating too little for your daily needs will put your body in "starvation emergency" mode and you'll pack on pounds at an astonishing rate. The key to dieting is finding the best point where you are getting what your body feels you need, and no more. Medical issues can screw up the body's set point and cause you to be either in overeating or starvation mode with no middleground, and that's unfortunately a no-win situation for the few that are in it.

Add to that exercise, but that IS going to make you require more food, but if you can burn 800 more calories from workout, and as a result your "ideal caloric intake" bumps up 500 calories (hence you eat more) you will lose weight with a net shed of 300 calories for the day.

OK, I'm going to weigh in here (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448296)

I am a fat man. I weight 370 pounds. (However, I am 6" 6' tall, but I'm still fat.) Now, this article does state that there are other factors. It names the skinny guy with the high metabolism on the 100 mile bike ride, but there is one factor (among many) that it doesn't consider. I live in a small apartment and drive a Honda Civic that gets 25MPG or better, even around town. (It gets 33 - 35MPG on the highway. All these fuel consumption figures are real measured figures that I've taken.) Lets look at my overall carbon output compared to the little 90 pound skinny woman driving her Chevy Suburban aggressively on her way home to her massive suburban McMansion, while talking on her cell phone no less. What's her carbon impact versus mine? How much more oil does it take to propel her massive SUV, especially when she's stomping on the gas with that big V8, then it does to propel my little 4 cylinder Civic? How much more oil does it take to heat and cool her massive house than my little apartment? I'd bet that we come out about the same, or that she might even end up producing more carbon than I do. There are so many factors that this article doesn't consider. All it really seems to do is give people an escape goat for global warming. Yes its all OK now, we can blame it on the fat people!

Re:OK, I'm going to weigh in here (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448416)

Dude,

NO WAY you fit in a Civic! :-)

Re:OK, I'm going to weigh in here (2, Insightful)

jlarocco (851450) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448488)

That's definitely true. But, if you cut your weight in half, you would get even better gas milage than you already do. When you take that effect and multiply it by all the "overweight" people in the world, it adds up.

Is dieting the best way to save fuel? Probably not. But being over weight does impact on fuel usage.

Global Warming is the Witch Hunt of our Day (1)

tjstork (137384) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448312)

Well, first, global warming was a scientific exploration of the relationship between climate and weather via the development of some butt ugly FORTRAN code. Then, it was something everyone had to be aware, then it became an orthodoxy. Now all of a sudden, fat people are worse because of global warming, and of course, its only a matter of time until movie makers, lawyers, or any other profession is under assault in some way, because of global warming. Just imagine how many union jobs, hanging on because cost was the driver, will be packed up and shipped to a non-CO2 country, because all of a sudden, its not just about cost, its about saving the planet...

in teh bigger picture of ....fuel... (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448314)

> I've uploaded a PDF of the email I received:
> http://billsey-christian.net/tmp/Bakken.pdf [billsey-christian.net]
>

Wow, guess mother earth must have cut them a deal.

But consider the Beverly Hill Billies, all it took for them was a single bullet.

The point should be clear. The cost of producing a barrel of oil is a man made amount. Much like the cost of producing any product. Thats is why technology created in the US often goes into production in another country with cheaper labor.

On a more interesting note, it turns out the the price of High Fructose Corn Syrup is going up and as it does food producers are looking for sweetener alternatives to use. Hinze for example is working on producing a sweeter tomato (without genetic engineering but by natural means) to replace the HFCS in ketchup

Here's the thing:

HFCS has been proven to raise triglycerides by as much as 1/3. I myself have lost 30 lbs by nothing more than removing it from my diet. So its really not good for the human body.

The reasons food manufactures use it, besides it having been a cheap sweetener is that it suppresses the sensors that tell you, you are full, causing you to eat more which the food manufactures like, as they sell more food that way.

The reason HFCS is going up in price is because corn is becoming very popular in the production of alternative fuels. This of course includes HFCS.

Oddly enough this fuel interest in corn is causing less corn to be used in feeding 3 world countries. Contributing to world hungar.

But overall it seems its better to use less pollutant fuels and for people to eat better by not eating HFCS contaminated foods.

Also as the price of petroleum based fuel goes up, the more financially likely that alternative fuels will be used more. And as the use of such alternative fuels increases the cost or price of it will likely go down due mass large scale production.

And to think, there was a time when the US government paid farmers to NOT grow crops in order to keep a cost to produce and sale price in check.

Just think, all those farmers that went out of business could go back in and grow corn.

As a final note: potash stocks (companies that mine it see: POT on the stock exchange) - are good investments

Gee... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448320)

Thanks. That makes me feel a lot better.

Regards,
Fat people

Re:Gee... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448412)

So this charity person shows up at my door. "They're starving in Africa." I say "I've been here all day, pal."

John Pinette [youtube.com]

I normally don't respond to crap like this. (5, Informative)

Blackneto (516458) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448324)

"It's a glandular problem!" Yeah, sure

But as a "large" person, bite my flabby ass.

not speaking for every fatass. But since I started working nights 10 years ago i've gained 150lbs.
Funny thing is I'm still as active and eat basically the same amount that I always have.

I've been big since puberty set in.
In HS i was 5'9" and weighed 240lbs. As i was playing football at the time I don't think it was a lack of exercise. I don't know what my calorie intake was at the time but it couldn't have been that much since we weren't very well off but my dad made enough to keep us off welfare. Never any huge amount of junk food or fatty food. Mostly carbs though. beans, rice, pasta and chicken.

In my 20's i reached my present height of 6ft. I was working construction and living in Brooklyn. I ate and drank pretty much whatever I wanted then but never got above 190.

FF to my 40's and 10 years of night work, sleep apnea and other nonsense I weigh 340. I eat maybe 2 times a day. I don't really eat sweets. My diet is mostly the same it was when I was a kid though I drink a lot more.
spent about 3 months writing down my food intake for the doctor I'm working with.
He didn't see anything abnormal. I average about 1900 calories a day.
I should be losing weight but I'm not. Possibilities include sleep deprivation, thyroid problem or diabetes (which i still test negative for even though both parents have adult onset)

Sure there are people that don't control what they eat, don't exercise and are seriously fat in the way you describe.
But I think there a lot of folks that due to different circumstances just can't maintain weight the way you or other people think they should.

FWIW, my family of 6 has a food budget of 540 a month not including 160 budgeted for eating out. this is pretty low for our area. most people i know that make the same amount of money as i do spend twice as much with less people in the house.

I don't have any figures about the amount of fuel we use. We have to have a minivan for all of us to go somewhere in one vehicle. And my personal vehicle is no gas miser. But I may only drive it 3000 miles a year. The minivan we've averaged about 9000mi/year since we bought it.
Until hydrogen powered cars become more widespread though we won't be buying any new vehicles.
I'm not wild about hybrids because i don't think batteries are any better for the environment than burning fuel.
Converting Gas engines to run hydrogen I think is the best bet.

I don't think our transportation impact is that great since we aren't running kids back and forth to activities every night and we have always made an effort to consolidate trips.

and last but not least. I view people that hold stock with BMI calculations with the same derision as those that in the past believed in phrenology.

Ah the new religion (4, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448326)

Ah the new religion,
Now combining the sudo sceince of global warming with a little good old fashion scapegoating.

Speaking as a 5'8" guy weighing in at around 135 pounds, this sounds alful facist to me. Nobody would call me fat but replace global warmin with economic struggles and fat people with jew and our intelectual elite sound pretty much like Hitler did in the the late 1920s.

Can we get back to real science before we completely destroy the world pretty please?

Re:Ah the new religion (1)

cptnapalm (120276) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448456)

sudo believe in global warming ;)

Re:Ah the new religion (0, Troll)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448526)

first, pseudoscience is false science, sudo is superuser do. second, there are clear lines of evidence pointing to the fact that 1) humans are a major or the major contributor of green house gases including CO2 and methane. 2) rises in CO2 and methane levels in our atmisphere trap heat more efficiently leading to an overall average warming of the entire planet, this has been and is being observed.

Nobody would call me fat but replace global warmin with economic struggles and fat people with jew and our intelectual elite sound pretty much like Hitler did in the the late 1920s.
don't try to turn this into "we're being persecuted!!!!" you have no comprehension of the magnitude of the holocaust or all the horrible things that have been done by the nazis. the nazi extermination of various peoples during the holocaust was based on hatred. this article O.T.O.H is hyperbole. do the obese require more fuel to go the same distances in cars/transportation? yes. does this have a large enough effect to warrent the conclusions of this article? most likely not.

Can we get back to real science before we completely destroy the world pretty please?
oh I agree, just not in any way to which you are referring. you suggest that global warming is a hoax and is to be ignored when the evidence doesn't warrent such a conclusion. you also suggest that the conclusions made in TFA are comparable to the naxis, that's also nonsense. you also fail to adress any of the medical benefits to losing weight in general, the decrease in heart attack/stroke risk as well as lower associated cancer risk. instead you attempt to elicit sympathy for an un-tenable position, tat doing absolutely nothing is the way to go.

Re:Ah the new religion (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448614)

you hit the nail square on the head, mod parent ^^^ up.

I for one welcome our obsese overlords (1, Interesting)

strathconaman (539781) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448342)

The obese only consume more until they are in their mid 50's [plosjournals.org] . After their deaths the thin and healthy live longer lives but and consume more than fat people over their lifespan.

I used to condemn fat people for their over use of pretty much everything. Now I relish crowds of fat people, especially people my age, as I know their early deaths will result in fewer people fighting for scarce resources in the future!

Eat up!

(Ok, I know it may be possible that what we are really talking about here is utilization rates of resources, and not total usage per person, but this is just a Slashdot post, give me a break!)

Tin foil hat time... (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448348)

Fat people are, however, much easier to control. No fat guy ever started, and won, a revolution. They are far too slow and lazy -- too slow to dodge a bullet and too large a target. And, talking of targets, they are also a great target market, you can sell them all sorts of things that people of normal mass will never need.

Fat people are patriots. Fat people won't ever be terrorists.

I kid, I kid...well, sort of... there is some truth there...

And another thing, the price of clothes and many other things is disproportionate. "S" costs the same as "XXL" -- and that's just a tax on the rest of us.

Actually, doctors do... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448368)

Stop providing medicine, let supply and demand, starvation cycles, plagues, etc. all have their effects and you'll quickly take care of the over burdening issues. A generation or two and we'll be back to levels the planet can support far better.

Addressing obese people will maybe effect, what, 20% of consumption?

The global human population was 2 billion a century ago. It passed 6,666,666,666 a week or so ago. Cutting down 20% of consumption is going to buy what, a decade? If we're lucky.

We can keep chasing cutesy ideas like blaming fat people, blaming the 15% who use 85%, blaming biofuels and all the rest of it. It doesn't change the fact that no amount of efficiency increases can keep pace with the crazy level at which humanity's going around breeding and its ability to ensure large numbers make it to a breeding age.

All we're achieving is saving 5 million people from suffering this generation so they can have 20 million kids that suffer next generation. Tragic as it is, which is better to let suffer? The five or the twenty?

We've really got three choices in the scheme of things:

Stop distorting natural die off cycles.

Readjust our birthrate to match the reality we live under.

Keep trying to make things more and more efficient, lamenting how awful things are that [group X] isn't playing fair, until we physically can't keep up and the die offs happen anyway.

They're not pleasant solutions but they're also the only realistic ones when no amount of efficiency increases can keep pace with a population that doubles every two or three generations.

bad headline (1)

robo_mojo (997193) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448374)

How do you get from:

Fat People Contribute More Human-Made CO2 Emissions Than Skinny People

to

Fat People Cause Global Warming

???

Makes sense (3, Funny)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448376)

So Calista Flockhart was in fact just caring for the environment? Who knew.

So, a couple of forum trolls... (2)

Hinhule (811436) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448464)

... made a troll scientific report and people actually dignify it by responding as if it would deserve the publicity.

"How to spot and deal a troll" should be a first grade class.

More "Fat" predjuice (2, Informative)

AntonDevious (879535) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448474)

Why we we have to hate. Its time to leave fat people alone. They are not the evil spawn of Satan. Go find some other class of people to hate like say Preppies.

Cartman says: (1)

LM741N (258038) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448478)

"Its all a bunch of tree hugging hippie crap."

Bad science (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448486)

So someone sweating on a bike uses less food energy than a couch potato? Bad science methinks.

At least fat people eat food (1)

sa1lnr (669048) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448490)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/7335188.stm [bbc.co.uk]

"Householders chuck out 6.7m tonnes of unwanted food every year at a cost to us of £8bn. That's the equivalent of chucking out one bag of food for every three that we buy."

this study is nonsense (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448494)

it's rubbish because it assumes people who are fat are that way because they eat more.

this is just plain wrong, it's usually WHAT they eat not how much, and it's also about exercise. all this proves is that some people will find a way to link anything to global warming in order to try get grant money.

It comes down to biomass.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448496)

..so let's kill of a few billions instead of bickering over some grams. That'll save the earth instead, but only if we go about it in a "green" way.

My proposal is "death by resource starvation". ..oh wait, it's already happening. Nothing to see here then, carry on.

What a title (0)

Mike Gerwitz (1209868) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448532)

Sounds like a Bush campaign.

Just to play devil's advocate here ... (5, Interesting)

NotBornYesterday (1093817) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448544)

... what about all the trim, muscular, athletic people? Think about it. If some guy runs, bikes, or goes to the gym a hour per day and lifts weights, isn't he eating more food, burning a lot more calories, and exhaling a lot more CO2 than a lazy s.o.b. sitting on his couch in a semi-vegetative state?

When you see a really obese person, don't think of them as 'fat'. Think of them as mobile carbon sequestration units.

The only people who deserve to live ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448558)

are vegan females.

Males don't deserve to live because any self respecting teenage male can consume his weight in food every day. Meat eating teenage males eat 100% more food than vegan females. With the miracles of modern science, the vegan females don't even need males for reproduction.

Not all skinny people are worth feeding. (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23448584)

The study assumes that all people are equally worthy of consuming food. The retards who did the study for instance, clearly are of very little benefit to society; and yet they are eating at least as much food as people who do good in this world.

It is also interesting that the study completely ignores flatulence. While some might guess that we of the wider persuasion give off more green house gasses, my experience suggests that the skinny little imps with high metabolisms are far more guilty in this regard.

It's the Economy, Stupid. (1)

NeuroManson (214835) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448588)

Poverty is one of the major contributers to global warming, as well as obesity.

Poor people:

Cannot afford to maintain their vehicles as often as they should, said vehicles therefore put out more pollutants and consume more gas.

Tend to get whatever the cheapest food on the market is. Have you ever read the nutritional data on most prepared foods, meal kits, or staples such as ramen noodles? These food "products" are incredibly high in starches, high fructose corn syrup (believed by many to be linked to both obesity and diabetes), fats, and salt.

Can't afford to buy Dom Perignon like so many rich skinny people would like them to, opting instead for the cheapest possible booze, such as beer, which comes with a massive caloric load.

And of course, the poorer families are, the more often parents hold two or more jobs, which of course leads again to commuting in inefficient cars with higher pollutant outputs, AND additional stress which also causes them to put on more weight.

Methinks those scientists ought to go outside into the real world for a change, instead of commiting hate crimes.

Yes, I said hate crimes. Just as you cannot change your sexual preferences or color to suit others, you cannot change your endocrine systems to do so either (there are actual medical conditions which can lead to obesity, so you can't just chalk it up to greed being the chief cause).

Not excited (1)

bobbonomo (997543) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448602)

Sorry but I can't seem to get excited about this scoop. It borders on pettiness. Who's next? ugly people, deformed, sick, weird, nerds?

I don't question the report or it's accuracy. It's probably right. I just did't expect it to make the news at Slashdot. Especially here.

BTW I am about normal weight for my age and size.

bad article title (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448610)

Fat People Cause Global Warming, Higher Food Prices

If you're going to go that route, how about contributing to

Saying "Cause" gives everyone the impression that it's the sole (or leading) factor, which is just stupid.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>