 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / April 2008Fitness and fatness as predictors of mortality from all causes....
Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Nov 1;156(9):832-41. Fitness and fatness as predictors of mortality from all causes and from cardiovascular disease in men and women in the lipid research clinics study. Stevens J, Cai J, Evenson KR, Thomas R. Department of Nutrition, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 27599, USA. June_Stevens@unc.edu The relative size of the effects of fitness and fatness on longevity has been studied in only one cohort. The authors examined this issue using data from 2,506 women and 2,860 men in the Lipid Research Clinics Study. The mean age was 46.6 years in women and 45.1 years in men at baseline (1972-1976). Fitness was assessed using a treadmill test, and fatness was assessed as body mass index calculated from measured height and weight. Participants were followed for vital status through 1998. Hazard ratios were calculated using proportional hazard models that included covariates for age, education, smoking, alcohol intake, and the dietary Keys score. Fitness and fatness were both associated with mortality from all causes and from cardiovascular disease. For mortality from all causes, the adjusted hazard ratios were 1.32 among the fit-fat, 1.30 among the unfit-not fat, and 1.57 among the unfit-fat women compared with fit-not fat women. Among men the same hazard ratios were 1.25, 1.44, and 1.49 [corrected]. There were no significant interactions between fitness and fatness in either men or women. The authors conclude that both fitness and fatness are risk factors for mortality, and that being fit does not completely reverse the increased risk associated with excess adiposity. Study: Moderate Exercise Cuts Stroke Risk NEW YORK, Feb. 22, 2008 (AP) Being merely moderately fit - walking briskly half an hour a day - can lower the risk of having a stroke, according to a new study whose findings apply to women as well as men. Much of the previous research on stroke and fitness has been on men and relied on participants to report their physical activity, said Steven Hooker, who heads the University of South Carolina's Prevention Research Center in Columbia and led the study. About a quarter of those in the new study were women, and everyone had a treadmill test to measure his or her fitness level. "It seems that benefits we've been observing in men for many years ... are also observed in women," Hooker said. He said even those who were moderately fit had a lower risk of stroke. Most people can reach that fitness range by walking briskly for 30 minutes a day, five times a week, said Hooker, who presented the findings Thursday at the International Stroke Conference in New Orleans. Stroke is the nation's third-leading cause of death. It occurswhen blood flow to the brain is stopped when a blood vessel is blocked by a clot or bursts. Hooker said physical activity can help prevent blood clots and the buildup of artery-clogging plaque. For their research, Hooker and his colleagues used data from a study of more than 61,000 adults at the Cooper Aerobics Center in Dallas. After taking a treadmill test, the participants periodically answered health surveys. The latest research divided the group into four levels of fitness and looked at how many of them had strokes, following them an average of 18 years. Overall, there were 692 strokes in men and 171 in women. The study found that men in the most fit group had a 40 percent lower risk of stroke than the least fit men. The most fit women had a 43 percent reduction in their risk of stroke compared with women in the least fit group. For moderate levels of fitness, the risk reduction ranged from 15 to 30 percent for men and 23 to 57 percent in women. The lower risks held true even when taking into account other risk factors for stroke such as smoking, weight, high blood pressure, diabetes and family history. Fitness is "a strong predictor of stroke risk all by itself," Hooker said. The study's participants were mostly white, well-educated and middle-income or higher; other populations should be studied, he said. Fitness tests were only done when people entered the study so the researchers didn't know if their fitness level changed over time. In its stroke prevention guidelines, the American Stroke Association recommends at least 30 minutes of physical activity of moderate intensity on most days of the week. The new study "is certainly consistent with all of the recommendations that we already have in place," said Dr. Larry Goldstein, a spokesman for the group and director of the Stroke Center at Duke University. www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/ 22/health/main3865270.shtml?source=related_story *** Walking briskly for 30 minutes 5 days a week? Gee, I think I heard that before, about obesity mortality rates... I'm betting brisk walking is all the exercise ANYONE needs to do to stay healthy and out of the danger zones of most illness. Stupidity, however, has no cure. Sorry trolls, there is no help for you. >Study: Moderate Exercise Cuts Stroke Risk >NEW YORK, Feb. 22, 2008 [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > >Stupidity, however, has no cure. Sorry trolls, there is no help for you. What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 minutes 5 days a week relative to a person of normal BMI who does the same? Cite your source. > >Study: Moderate Exercise Cuts Stroke Risk > >NEW YORK, Feb. 22, 2008 [quoted text clipped - 75 lines] > > - Show quoted text - First off, nice double post you moron. Secondly, do you really think you or any other Brit fag is qualified to argue logic with anyone in the western world? Why is it that you brits are the only western country that spends millions in tax dollars each year simply to keep a family of ugly inbred morons living in the lap of luxury (royals) and yet you deny overweight TAX PAYERS necessary medical services? You people not only are hygienically challenged you’re mentally challenged as well. W. >Study: Moderate Exercise Cuts Stroke Risk >NEW YORK, Feb. 22, 2008 [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > >Stupidity, however, has no cure. Sorry trolls, there is no help for you. What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 minutes 5 days a week relative to a person of normal BMI who does the same? Cite your source. > What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the > clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 minutes 5 > days a week relative to a person of normal BMI who does the same? Cite > your source. Obviously, the idea of mortality that is independent of BMI is unthinkable to Kenny. Studies exist that say flat out that mortality is corelated to fitness, and is INDEPENDENT of BMI. But Kenny can't wrap his brain around that. If there was no corelation to BMI under 40, but there was a corelation with the BMI was above 40, wouldn't the studies say that? Since they don't, Kenny's brain short circuts, and smoke pours out of his ears. The assumption is that the study is flawed, Kenny cannot consider that his uneducated opinion is wrong. In his world, it's the 15 years of medical research that is flawed. Stupid Kenny... On Apr 21, 5:46 am, The Master <tar...@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> wrote: > > What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the > > clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 minutes 5 [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Stupid Kenny... The level of fitness chosen for this study was brisk walking for two reasons that were not stated. First, it is easily measured because most people can at least walk. Measuring running ability would be impossible with 80 % of possible subjects being unable to run at all.. Second, brisk walking is an enty level of exercise and fitness- ability. If benefit could be demonstrated with the easiest rung on the exercise ladder then that would be good news worth promugating. But this says nothing about the additional huge benefits obtainable with actually being able to jog 2 or 3 miles and doing so regularly. Like reversing diabetes and hypertension, for starters. Also in the background is the fact that being fat makes it much harder to stay fit and being fit makes it much harder to stay fat. So, living as "fat but fit" is something of a lost cause over the long term in the vast majority of cases. > On Apr 21, 5:46 am, The Master <tar...@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > The level of fitness chosen for this study was brisk walking for two > reasons that were not stated. Actually, that's not true. The level of fitness was measured by having all of the participants take a standard treadmill fitness test and then following them for 18 years and seeing how many died from strokes. The conclusion was that performing poorly (as defined by being in the lowest quartile) on a standard treadmill fitness test was an excellent predictor for stroke victims. At no time was "brisk walking" ever part of the experiment. The brisk walking bit is merely a personal belief from one of the study authors as to what it would take to move someone out of the lowest quartile. He said even those who were moderately fit had a lower risk of stroke. Most people can reach that fitness range by walking briskly for 30 minutes a day, five times a week, said Hooker, who presented the findings Thursday at the International Stroke Conference in New Orleans. Even Dr. Hooker qualifies this by saying that "most people" can reach this level of fitness with brisk walking. > First, it is easily measured because most people can at least > walk. Measuring running ability would be impossible with 80 % of > possible subjects being unable to run at all.. That's a great theory, but that's not how treadmill fitness tests work at all. Basically the tests start out slow and at a low incline and increase both in speed and incline until the person can't continue any longer. Here's a table showing the popular Bruce protocol. Time (min) 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 Speed (mph) 1.7 2.5 3.4 4.2 5.0 5.5 6.0 Grade (%) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 As you can see the test starts out a leisurely walk, but it soon speeds up to the point where a brisk walk every day won't prepare you for the strain. > Second, brisk walking is an enty level of exercise and fitness- > ability. If benefit could be demonstrated with the easiest rung on the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > fit" is something of a lost cause over the long term in the vast > majority of cases. Exactly. The take home message is that stroke appears to be that if you can outrun someone, you are probably less likely to die of a stroke than they are. The good news is that in this particular case even a little bit of exercise appears to help a great deal. So while you don't get the 40% reduction of being in the top quartile without a significant amount of work, you can get a 15% reduction just by being able to outrun the slowest quartile. Jason > Also in the background is the fact that being fat makes it much harder > to stay fit and being fit makes it much harder to stay fat. That may very well be true. But such instances do exist, where fat people remained fit. Furthermore, being skinny doesn't help all by itself, the person must also be fit. In other words, the fitness level of the subjects mattered, not the BMI. > So, living > as "fat but fit" is something of a lost cause over the long term in > the vast majority of cases. And I never said that for the vast majority of obese people, such a situation is common. >>What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the >>clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 minutes 5 [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Stupid Kenny... Are you being evasive or did you not understand my simple question? >>> What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the >>> clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 minutes 5 >>> days a week relative to a person of normal BMI who does the same? Cite >>> your source. >> > Are you being evasive or did you not understand my simple question? I understand it. I'm just opting to mock you instead. While Doctor Blair's study didn't deal with stroke specifically, it did mention mortality in general. He found no corelation to BMI, just fitness. The second study that I mentioned about stroke also found no corelation to BMI, just fitness. No place in either study does it say that there is no corelation to BMI if BMI is under 40, but there is a corelation to BMI if BMI is over 40. Since there is no mention of a corelation, there is no corelation. Your requested "cites" are two medical studies that have already been posted, and a basic statistics class. Your continued insistance that there is a corelation, even though one has yet to be found, is very telling, somewhat disturbing, but very funny. I'm sure you will now bitch, moan, and complain, just like you always do... >>>>What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the >>>>clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 minutes 5 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >second study that I mentioned about stroke also found no corelation to >BMI, just fitness. Where was the data for the group of people with BMI's in excess of 40 in Dr Blair's study? >No place in either study does it say that there is no corelation to BMI if >BMI is under 40, but there is a corelation to BMI if BMI is over 40. Since >there is no mention of a corelation, there is no corelation. There was no data presented fpr people with BMI's exceeding 40 to support a corelation, or lack thereof, dumbass. There was also no data in the studies stating that people who play Russian Roulette every weekend have a higher mortality rate than those who have never played. This coming from someone who describes this method of measuring BMI: From: The Master <tardis@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> Subject: Re: What's the Army's policy on overweight recruits? Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:08:00 +0000 Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0804231305280.759@sdf.lonestar.org> "f the weight it too high, they measure various parts of the person's body to figure out BMI." **end quote** You are hardly an authority on BMI, dumbass. >Your requested "cites" are two medical studies that have already been >posted, and a basic statistics class. Your continued insistance that >there is a corelation, even though one has yet to be found, is very >telling, somewhat disturbing, but very funny. Where did I say there was a corelation? You implied such when you wrote this: From: The Master <tardis@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> Subject: Re: Obesity epidemic (TOTALLY acceptable) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:56:19 +0000 Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0804111344260.28048@sdf.lonestar.org> "I may be fat, but I CAN walk briskly for 30 minutes... According to the study, my risk of mortality is the same as a skinny person who can do the same 30 minute brisk walk." **end quote** Unless you want to deny it right now, your BMI is over 40. You have admitted that 3X shirts are getting tight on you. Without supporting data, how did you come up with this conclusion? Morbid Obesity (BMI 40+) is a unique class that the studies did not provide data for. >I'm sure you will now bitch, moan, and complain, just like you always do... You're out of your league, dumbass. Take your spankin' like a good dumbass. >>>>>What is the risk of stroke for a person who has a BMI of over 40 (the >>>>>clinical defintion of morbid obesity) who walks briskly for 30 [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > You're out of your league, dumbass. Take your spankin' like a good > dumbass. I bet 1,000 quatloos TM ignores this post  SignatureLook at that. The one, the only, the original, the stupid Naughty Boy is back. Who said Usenet couldn't go further downhill? > Where was the data for the group of people with BMI's in excess of 40 in Dr > Blair's study? Write him and ask for it. >> No place in either study does it say that there is no corelation to BMI if >> BMI is under 40, but there is a corelation to BMI if BMI is over 40. Since >> there is no mention of a corelation, there is no corelation. > > There was no data presented fpr people with BMI's exceeding 40 to support a > corelation, or lack thereof, dumbass. LOL!!!!! If you want it so bad, ask him for it. Don't insist there is a corelation when no evidence exists that there is one. I, however, have proof that no corelation exists. You are clutching at straws, demanding proof of a lack of corelation specifically for those above some figure you picked out of your a.s for the fun of it. No corelation means no corelation, period. Deal with it. >>Where was the data for the group of people with BMI's in excess of 40 in Dr >>Blair's study? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >LOL!!!!! If you want it so bad, ask him for it. You need the data to support you claim. > Don't insist there is a >corelation when no evidence exists that there is one. I never said one did exist. You inferred that. > I, however, have >proof that no corelation exists. So why are you claiming as such, dumbass? > You are clutching at straws, demanding >proof of a lack of corelation specifically for those above some figure you >picked out of your a.s for the fun of it. Why did you snip out the part where I spnak'd your a.s? >No corelation means no corelation, period. Deal with it. I am going to repost the part that you snipped out, coward. Do you have the BALLS to respond without snipping? >I understand it. I'm just opting to mock you instead. While Doctor >Blair's study didn't deal with stroke specifically, it did mention >mortality in general. He found no corelation to BMI, just fitness. The >second study that I mentioned about stroke also found no corelation to >BMI, just fitness. Where was the data for the group of people with BMI's in excess of 40 in Dr Blair's study? >No place in either study does it say that there is no corelation to BMI if >BMI is under 40, but there is a corelation to BMI if BMI is over 40. Since >there is no mention of a corelation, there is no corelation. There was no data presented fpr people with BMI's exceeding 40 to support a corelation, or lack thereof, dumbass. There was also no data in the studies stating that people who play Russian Roulette every weekend have a higher mortality rate than those who have never played. This coming from someone who describes this method of measuring BMI: From: The Master <tardis@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> Subject: Re: What's the Army's policy on overweight recruits? Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:08:00 +0000 Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0804231305280.759@sdf.lonestar.org> "f the weight it too high, they measure various parts of the person's body to figure out BMI." **end quote** You are hardly an authority on BMI, dumbass. >Your requested "cites" are two medical studies that have already been >posted, and a basic statistics class. Your continued insistance that >there is a corelation, even though one has yet to be found, is very >telling, somewhat disturbing, but very funny. Where did I say there was a corelation? You implied such when you wrote this: From: The Master <tardis@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> Subject: Re: Obesity epidemic (TOTALLY acceptable) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:56:19 +0000 Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0804111344260.28048@sdf.lonestar.org> "I may be fat, but I CAN walk briskly for 30 minutes... According to the study, my risk of mortality is the same as a skinny person who can do the same 30 minute brisk walk." **end quote** Unless you want to deny it right now, your BMI is over 40. You have admitted that 3X shirts are getting tight on you. Without supporting data, how did you come up with this conclusion? Morbid Obesity (BMI 40+) is a unique class that the studies did not provide data for. > >>Where was the data for the group of people with BMI's in excess of 40 in Dr > >>Blair's study? [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > how did you come up with this conclusion? Morbid Obesity (BMI 40+) is a > unique class that the studies did not provide data for. Dude at this point give it up already. You've already proven the fact that you are a clueless a.s. Anymore out of you would just be redundant. W. >Dude at this point give it up already. I laugh when I look at the fatty f.cking losers like you and TM in these links. http://www.capitalnaafa.org/images/08mar/08mar.html http://www.capitalnaafa.org/images/07jun/07jun.html http://www.capitalnaafa.org/images/07swim/07swim.html http://homepage.mac.com/joeobrin/naafapool04/pool04.html http://www.capitalnaafa.org/images/2006oct/2006oct.html > >Dude at this point give it up already. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > http://www.capitalnaafa.org/images/2006oct/2006oct.html It's amazing how you go out of your way to prove what everyone says about you. It's almost as if you WANT to be thought of as an ignorant fuckstick. LOL. W. >> >Dude at this point give it up already. >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >It's amazing how you go out of your way to prove what everyone says >about you. The links had already been posted here by someone else. I simply borrowed them. >It's almost as if you WANT to be thought of as an ignorant >fuckstick. LOL. The truth hurts, eh? Fatty f.cking Loser Fatty f.cking Loser Fatty f.cking Loser Fatty f.cking Loser Fatty f.cking Loser Fatty f.cking Loser Fatty f.cking Loser Fatty f.cking Loser > It's amazing how you go out of your way to prove what everyone says > about you. It's almost as if you WANT to be thought of as an ignorant > fuckstick. LOL. It's better then what his mother calls him. > I laugh when I look at the fatty f.cking losers like you and TM in these > links. > > http://www.capitalnaafa.org/images/08mar/08mar.html Starting at the upper left hand corner, moving to the right, at the end dropping to the far left of the next row, moving down... Dude, hot chick, not hot chicks hot chicks, scarry dude, hot chicks blank, one not hot chick (dark) and one hot chick (green), not hot chick Can't tell, dude, not hot chick You get the idea. In other words, not everyone is attracted to the same people as you are. I'm even sure some people who like skinny women won't think all the ones you like are attractive. Some people like Sarah Jessica Parker, others think she is ugly. I think she's an ugly dude in a dress... As for my quick look at the page you mentioned, I'm even sure there are guys who like BBWs who would have different opinions about the ones I mentioned. On Apr 25, 9:40 am, The Master <tar...@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> wrote: > > I laugh when I look at the fatty f.cking losers like you and TM in these > > links. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > guys who like BBWs who would have different opinions about the ones I > mentioned. For the most part most of the people pictured are very average looking and in real life none of them would draw much attention either way. Kenny just doesn't have anything of substance to come back with so he makes it up as he goes along in the hopes that his troll buddies will be stupid enough to join in. I also suspect that he makes fun of the people in those pics out of jealousy simply because he has most likely never been invited to any type of social event in his pathetic life. W. >> I laugh when I look at the fatty f.cking losers like you and TM in these >> links. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > guys who like BBWs who would have different opinions about the ones I > mentioned. Sure, there are men who are attracted to obese women, but only because they are losers who haven't got a hope in hell of attracting a normal sized woman. The Master springs to mind. SignatureLook at that. The one, the only, the original, the stupid Naughty Boy is back. Who said Usenet couldn't go further downhill? >>> There was no data presented fpr people with BMI's exceeding 40 to support a >>> corelation, or lack thereof, dumbass. >> >> LOL!!!!! If you want it so bad, ask him for it. > > You need the data to support you claim. Blair study. No corelation to BMI. Now, prove that there is a corelation for those above 40, stupid Kenny. No corelation means no corelation. That's my proof. Now, prove me wrong. Go ahead, do it! You can't, can you? Tuff luck, you lose... >> Don't insist there is a >> corelation when no evidence exists that there is one. > > I never said one did exist. You inferred that. Then the proof is the Blair study. No corelation means no corelation. >> I, however, have >> proof that no corelation exists. > > So why are you claiming as such, dumbass? Now who needs the help understanding what they read. YOU are insisting that there is a corelation. The Blair study, however, says that no such corelation exists. I'm not claiming a corleation exists, you are... I have proof that there is no corelation, you have mud to sling. >> You are clutching at straws, demanding >> proof of a lack of corelation specifically for those above some figure you >> picked out of your a.s for the fun of it. > > Why did you snip out the part where I spnak'd your a.s? Reaching around and trying to tap my thigh as I'm tanning your a.s with my belt is hardly you spanking me. Check your own a.s Kenny, because it is raw. > Where was the data for the group of people with BMI's in excess of 40 in Dr > Blair's study? Doctor Blair's study said there is no corleation to BMI. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. No corelation means no corelation. Understand yet, stupid kenny? Ask your parents for a dictionary. >>>>There was no data presented fpr people with BMI's exceeding 40 to support a >>>>corelation, or lack thereof, dumbass. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >YOU are insisting that there is a corelation. Here's the part that you keep snipping out from every reply that demonstrates your snip and run cowardice: Where did I say there was a corelation? You implied such when you wrote this: From: The Master <tardis@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> Subject: Re: Obesity epidemic (TOTALLY acceptable) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:56:19 +0000 Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0804111344260.28048@sdf.lonestar.org> "I may be fat, but I CAN walk briskly for 30 minutes... According to the study, my risk of mortality is the same as a skinny person who can do the same 30 minute brisk walk." **end quote** Unless you want to deny it right now, your BMI is over 40. You have admitted that 3X shirts are getting tight on you. Without supporting data, how did you come up with this conclusion? Morbid Obesity (BMI 40+) is a unique class that the studies did not provide data for. This coming from someone who describes this method of measuring BMI: From: The Master <tardis@nospam.sdf.lonestar.org.nospam> Subject: Re: What's the Army's policy on overweight recruits? Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:08:00 +0000 Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0804231305280.759@sdf.lonestar.org> "f the weight it too high, they measure various parts of the person's body to figure out BMI." **end quote** Snip and run cowardice is not victory. STUDY: There is no corelation to BMI ME: There is no corleation to BMI KENNY: Show me proof for people with BMI over 40 ME: Study already said no corleation to BMI KENNY: But I want for BMI over 40 only ME: No corelation to BMI means no corelation to BMI KENNY: But I want for BMI over 40 only Stupid Kenny... > Study: Moderate Exercise Cuts Stroke Risk > NEW YORK, Feb. 22, 2008 [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > Stupidity, however, has no cure. Sorry trolls, there is no help for > you. How can obese people "walk briskly"? I've never seen one do it yet. SignatureLook at that. The one, the only, the original, the stupid Naughty Boy is back. Who said Usenet couldn't go further downhill? > Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Nov 1;156(9):832-41. > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > fit does not completely reverse the increased risk associated with > excess adiposity. Will Manchez listen? No..... > Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Nov 1;156(9):832-41. > > Fitness and fatness as predictors of mortality from all causes and > from cardiovascular disease in men and women in the lipid research > clinics study. No duh! >> Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Nov 1;156(9):832-41. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > No duh! So? Who cares if these fat f.cks die sooner? lol Hey TM-your barnacle is blubbering again. LV "I rode a tank and held a general's rank When the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank." ---Sympathy for the Devil-The Rolling Stones -------------------------------------------- "A fanatic cannot change his mind and will not change the subject." ---Winston Churchill ---------------------------------------------- Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.