User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 108

  1. #81
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan View Post
    No, smoking is a behaviour, not a characteristic. The equivilent is saying that bad breath and yellow teeth cause cancer.
    First of all, you missed the whole point, which was about statistical significance.

    Secondly, your own analogy is poor. It appears that being overweight directly relates to diabetes, and some qualitative theories on that have been developed (which are mentioned in the wiki article). So, weight increases diabetes. Eating more and excercizing less increases weight. So, you see what we got here? If A = B, and B = C, then A = C. Eating more an exercising less increases diabetes!

    If you want to analogize to that, you could have said that having tarred lungs increases the odds of lung cancer. That would have been closer to what I was saying. Smoking tars your lungs, tarred lungs increases your odds of lung cancer. So... Smoking = increased lung cancer.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  2. #82
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    It appears that being overweight directly relates to diabetes
    Being a bank teller also directly relates to bank robberies, so what's your point?

    So, weight increases diabetes.
    Or (the genetic propensity for and side effects of) diabetes increases weight...

    Eating more and excercizing less increases weight. So, you see what we got here? If A = B, and B = C, then A = C. Eating more an exercising less increases diabetes!
    The difference with smoking is there is an obvious point in the system which can be used as the root, there is an on/off point, you either smoke or you don't, an obese person does not have the option of quitting eating as a smoker does. You may want to use the eat more, exercise less ratio as your set point, however eating, exercising and weight are all sliding scales, through in psychology, and genetics and it becomes incredibly complex, we have no idea what each individuals ideal set point is and any error (as considered reasonable for any human) could have exponential results at the other end. Also children aren't given cigarettes from birth.

    Smoking [action] tars [attribute] your lungs, tarred lungs [attribute] increases your odds of lung cancer[attribute]. Smoking [action] = increased lung cancer [attribute].


    X [action] causes obesity [attribute], obesity increases your odds of diabetes [attribute]. Therefore X [action] = increased diabetes [attribute].

    Humans can only control actions not attributes.

    If you can define exactly what X is and prove whether X can be reasonably reversed by an adult obese person you will have a point.
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  3. #83
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan View Post
    Being a bank teller also directly relates to bank robberies, so what's your point?
    Well, actaully, a bank teller is more likely to experience a bank robbery, because being a bank teller puts one in the position for it. That makes perfect sense. The circumstance that the person put themselves in increases their odds of experiencing a certain event. The correlation is actually rather meaningful. That wasn't really a good job of making correlations looks faulty.

    Anyhow, I don't think it was actualy very relevant to the particular sort of situation we are talking about here.


    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan View Post
    Or (the genetic propensity for and side effects of) diabetes increases weight...
    If the weight gain is itself rooted in genes, I'd like you to tell me what caused such a recent explosion of this particular set of genes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan View Post
    The difference with smoking is there is an obvious point in the system which can be used as the root, there is an on/off point, you either smoke or you don't, an obese person does not have the option of quitting eating as a smoker does. You may want to use the eat more, exercise less ratio as your set point, however eating, exercising and weight are all sliding scales, through in psychology, and genetics and it becomes incredibly complex, we have no idea what each individuals ideal set point is and any error (as considered reasonable for any human) could have exponential results at the other end. Also children aren't given cigarettes from birth.
    None of this is important, statistically. The question is not qualitative, it's quantitative. It doesn't matter that all people eat, or all people are sedentary some of the time, what I'm looking for is the amount. If for some reason, all human beings smoked, and started smoking at the age of 2, I would still be able to find a quantifiable correlation between the amounted smoked and the incidence of lung cancer.

    Further more, smoking is also on those sliding scales you mention. People handle it differently in psyschological terms, and different people have physiologies more or less resistant to those chemicals, etc... This does not keep me from noticing a general trend.

    A set point is not as hard to find as you are making it out to be. There is too high, and every doctor knows there is also too low, and studies have been done, in huge numbers, to start formulating an average. And I mean sample sizes so freakin' huge at this point that one can start generalizing about 6.7 billion people. You know, we are all the same species.

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan View Post
    Smoking [action] tars [attribute] your lungs, tarred lungs [attribute] increases your odds of lung cancer[attribute]. Smoking [action] = increased lung cancer [attribute].


    X [action] causes obesity [attribute], obesity increases your odds of diabetes [attribute]. Therefore X [action] = increased diabetes [attribute].

    Humans can only control actions not attributes.

    If you can define exactly what X is and prove whether X can be reasonably reversed by an adult obese person you will have a point.
    Yeah, actually we can control attributes because they are often the product of actions. I can define X here essentially as well as I could in case of smoking. Are you convinced that eating and exercise don't have to do with body weight?
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #84
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Also the accusation that people get Diabetes type II by choice is a very serious one and an incredibly hurtful accusation if you're wrong, are you sure you're on solid ground with that accusation?

    The concordance rate for Type II diabetes in monozygotic twins is very high even in twins initially ascertained discordant for diabetes.
    Concordance rate for type II diabetes mellitus in ...[Diabetologia. 1999] - PubMed Result
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  5. #85
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan View Post
    Also the accusation that people get Diabetes type II by choice is a very serious one and an incredibly hurtful accusation if you're wrong, are you sure you're on solid ground with that accusation?



    Concordance rate for type II diabetes mellitus in ...[Diabetologia. 1999] - PubMed Result
    If you mean this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Hey, man.. you talked about money. And frankly, I don't think you can argue that being a diabetic is an enjoyable life choice, so it's not all about my interests.
    It's because I was responding semi-facetiously to your comment. I don't think they are making a conscious choice to have diabetes. The point of the post was more about the fact that you were implying the anti-obesity were being self-absorbed. I was pointing out that it would be silly to consider the unselfish perspective one that allows people to inflict themselves with diabetes.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  6. #86
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Well, actaully, a bank teller is more likely to experience a bank robbery, because being a bank teller puts one in the position for it. That makes perfect sense. The circumstance that the person put themselves in increases their odds of experiencing a certain event. The correlation is actually rather meaningful. That wasn't really a good job of making correlations looks faulty.
    My point wasn't to prove correlations faulty but to show they cannot always tell you who the robber is.

    If the weight gain is itself rooted in genes, I'd like you to tell me what caused such a recent explosion of this particular set of genes.
    Then genes were probably always there, it could be any number of triggers, what exactly they are or if people have control of those triggers isn't proven. So I will assume innocence.


    None of this is important, statistically. The question is not qualitative, it's quantitative. It doesn't matter that all people eat, or all people are sedentary some of the time, what I'm looking for is the amount. If for some reason, all human beings smoked, and started smoking at the age of 2, I would still be able to find a quantifiable correlation between the amounted smoked and the incidence of lung cancer.
    Well find me the study that shows that a significant amount of obese adults are able to lose and maintain a "normal" BMI, within a lifestyle that could be considered reasonable AND a study showing that this reduction in body weight will decrease their share of health costs. Heck even give me a study showing that obese people take a greater proportion of tax money over their lives. If you can do that, I will tip my hat to you, untill then I will assume their innocence.

    Further more, smoking is also on those sliding scales you mention. People handle it differently in psyschological terms, and different people have physiologies more or less resistant to those chemicals, etc... This does not keep me from noticing a general trend.
    It has been statistically proven that humans are able to quit smoking and stay that way for greater than 5 years. Show me equal evidence that obese people are statistically able to lose and maintain a "normal" BMI for greater than 5 years.

    A set point is not as hard to find as you are making it out to be. There is too high, and every doctor knows there is also too low, and studies have been done, in huge numbers, to start formulating an average. And I mean sample sizes so freakin' huge at this point that one can start generalizing about 6.7 billion people. You know, we are all the same species.
    What good would an average do anyway? There are so many factors facing individuals, I don't understand how you can see the physiological and psychological process of weight control as anything but complex.



    Yeah, actually we can control attributes because they are often the product of actions.
    Duh. You cannot blame an attribute as it does nothing, if you want to blame something you blame the action.

    I can define X here essentially as well as I could in case of smoking. Are you convinced that eating and exercise don't have to do with body weight?
    I think that X (smoking) in the case of lung cancer is much simpler and better understood than X (???) in the case of diabetes.
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  7. #87
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    It's because I was responding semi-facetiously to your comment. I don't think they are making a conscious choice to have diabetes. The point of the post was more about the fact that you were implying the anti-obesity were being self-absorbed. I was pointing out that it would be silly to consider the unselfish perspective one that allows people to inflict themselves with diabetes.
    That comment was more directed at the sentiment of earlier posters. The rest of your post isn't making a lot of sense to me.
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  8. #88
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

  9. #89
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Those are interesting examples, although I'm not familiar with healthcare in the US so a lot of it went over my head.

    What would be interesting to know is what proportion of the extra medical cost came from procedures treating the "disease" of obesity rather than the actual obesity related diseases, doctors are also known to prescribe greater quantities of expensive drugs to the obese even if there is no proven benefit of the higher quantities.

    From the study:
    However, because of the relatively
    large standard errors generated from the bootstrap algorithm, we cannot reject the hypothesis that the percentage increase in spending is identical across payers.
    Take away some of the factors I mentioned above and who knows what the result might be? Also if you took out the top and bottom 5% of BMIs what would the differences be then? I bet most of the extra costs would lie in the statistical extremes ( underweight and very obese).

    Take away the moral panic and hysteria and the cost would be lower I reckon. What must really rile the people who don't like to pay for the obese is the obesity paradox, which is where obesity has been shown to be correlated with disease but also with disease survival, so they get sick and then just don't die (how dare they)! That must really get up people's goat.

    OK I admit to telling a fib about obese people dying earlier, they actually have similar life expectancy as "normal" weight people.
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  10. #90
    heart on fire
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,457

    Default

    My family full of diabetics, all became diabetic in middle age, some were thin when they became diabetic and some fat. Didn't seem to make a lot of difference.

Similar Threads

  1. MBTI appeal of Death Note anime?
    By Economica in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 171
    Last Post: 12-25-2015, 03:42 PM
  2. Jian Ghomeshi, CBC radio host, fired over sex allegations
    By 93JC in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-03-2014, 11:14 PM
  3. How do we gain power over death?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-19-2009, 03:38 PM
  4. The Great Blog Transplant - Sign up now!
    By cafe in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-28-2007, 10:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO