By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - YOU'RE OVERWEIGHT! does it always say that ? =[

Kasz216 on 18 October 2009
Demotruk said:
Kasz216 said:

There really aren't any facts when it comes to healthcare statistics.  Just political spin.

If you looke at Demotruk he stated that both the US healthcare sysem is worse, and the US has a worse lifestyle.

Yet the US stats aren't very far behind Europe in life expectancy... the difference of which can actually be explained by the fact that the US has a lot more murders.

Outside that, the US has higher survival rates for most major causes of death then europeon countries including the big 3 killers that account for most premature deaths.

You are more likely to live longer in europe.  Yet, if you have a major illness you are more likely to survive in the US.

The second is a much better indicator of healthcare if you ask me.  Actual treatment of illnesses vs simple life expectancy which can be effected by crime rates and culutral problems like overeating.

Also different reporting methods... since pretty much every europeon countries have "qualfiers" on what counts as a baby.  If it dies after birth but is too small it is not considered a child.  While the US counts any child birthed no matter how small our light it was.

There's a lot more to life expectancy than the health care you get. There's far too much noise to use that as an indicator, and nobody said that Americans had a lifestyle that led to higher death rates. Even with a much higher murder rate in the US, murder barely makes a difference to the death rate, not that it matters.

As I said in my first post, being overweight may actually increase your life expectancy.

There is a lot more to life expectancy then the health care you get.

That's just the only "healthcare" statistic that paints US healthcare as worse then other healthcare.  That and infant mortality... but that's becausethe US records it differently.

 



Around the Network
greenmedic88 on 19 October 2009
KingArthur said:
greenmedic88 said:
Hockey and tackle football players are almost the reverse when it comes to weight. When the trend in the NFL was to have bigger and bigger linemen, NFL players had to literally eat their way into making the cut and keep eating to stay there.

Of course it takes a lot of calories to maintain high muscle mass. Bodybuilders are notorious for this.

Check the chart out though; none are listed as being over 20% (not including women who have a different scale for body fat %).

http://www.sport-fitness-advisor.com/bodyfatpercentage.html

Feeling fatter yet?! lol

Feeling fatter? Absolutely not. :)

I can only comment about the hockey part of that table. We have roughly 60 players on our team/reservers. 2 of us have body fat percentage 9 or less. 9 of us have bf% higher than 15%. Those are measured when we start our training after summer so those results are a bit high. So that table looks ok for hockey players.

Anyhow, the table shows that ideal body fat percentage for non-athletes is 9-15%. Do you really think that 20% would be unhealthy?

 

The key thing you mentioned was that the body fat stats were taken pre-season, which is the equivalent of weighing in after a summer vacation; almost everyone, barring the freakishly trim or those with compulsive gym work ethics aren't going to start training anywhere near peak condition (probably those 2 lean guys).

9-15% seems a bit low for non-athletes, but I'm thinking I'd just LIKE to believe that so that I could be content at around 16% when not actively training. I'm not content at 16% though; I know for a fact I should drop about 5lbs of fat to be in competitive condition which would put me closer to 12% or less. And that would be before the build up immediately leading up to a sanctioned bout.

The reason that probably seems low is because averages have Americans as being a fair degree higher than those numbers. But really all that means is that the average American has a higher percentage of body fat than they need or should have.

Tanita (who manufactures body fat/water percentage scales) suggests anything past 20% for men is past "healthy." The average for normal, non-athletes is supposedly closer to 22% for men (7-10% over).



Jumpin on 19 October 2009
greenmedic88 said:
Jumpin said:

I wouldn't believe anyone who says they're 6 foot 4, 230 pounds and claim they're not overweight. I am 6 foot 4, wide framed, large boned, and athletic, and I weigh 195 pounds.

Even professional athletes often fall within BMI ranges, only the huge ones don't; some athletes have extra fat too. Anyway, for an example close enough to 6 foot 4 230; here is Alistair Overeem when he won the Strikeforce heavyweight title, he was 6 foot 5 and weighed 225 pounds:



BMI = 26.7, not far out of the BMI range, but I am sure guys who work out all the time like Overeem are past the point where they would question BMI. This is a very small fraction of the population. Most common critics of BMI are just people who don't want to admit they have fatty pounds that they should lose.

Professional fighters are probably not the best example to use for the validity of the BMI system since competition is based upon weight classes which invariably means athletes must cut weight before weighing in the day before their bout.

Typically, a fighter cuts anywhere from 5-10% of their body weight the day before a bout (drop water weight in the sauna, emptying GI tract, etc.), often more. So a fighter who weighs in at 225 lbs to make the weight limit actually walks around at 240lbs or more. If a fighter is really competing in the weight class he should be in, there isn't much room for excess weight (fat) if he doesn't want to cut a lot of weight before a fight. Most compete in lower weight classes than they really should to stay competitive. And they do this by dropping a significant amount of water weight before weighing in.

 

He didn't cut weight. That was his weight for the fight. The heavyweight division has a 265 cap.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin on 19 October 2009
Kasz216 said:
N.Genckel said:
dbot said:
Demotruk said:

Most European countries have better health care systems than the US, they report well. People in the US just have a very different lifestyle than Europeans, one that tends towards being overweight.

The odd thing is, our definition of "overweight" relates to normalcy, not to the health effects. Recent studies have shown it's better to be overweight than normal weight, and it's worse to be underweight than obese, in terms of life expectancy. This is likely due to the fact that while there are health negatives from being overweight, having extra weight increases your chances of surviving many illnesses.

 

(I say this as someone who is underweight)

I vehemently disagree with your first point regarding the quality of health care systems, but will not derail the thread to discuss it.  My point the obesity data is somewhat misleading because very few countries (such as the US and UK) report data based on actual measurements.  Third World countries under report their data because they are using estimates.

 

You can't disagree with facts. But it does look like Obama is going to try and change that, so good on him.

There really aren't any facts when it comes to healthcare statistics.  Just political spin.

If you looke at Demotruk he stated that both the US healthcare sysem is worse, and the US has a worse lifestyle.

Yet the US stats aren't very far behind Europe in life expectancy... the difference of which can actually be explained by the fact that the US has a lot more murders.

Outside that, the US has higher survival rates for most major causes of death then europeon countries including the big 3 killers that account for most premature deaths.

You are more likely to live longer in europe.  Yet, if you have a major illness you are more likely to survive in the US.

The second is a much better indicator of healthcare if you ask me.  Actual treatment of illnesses vs simple life expectancy which can be effected by crime rates and culutral problems like overeating.

Also different reporting methods... since pretty much every europeon countries have "qualfiers" on what counts as a baby.  If it dies after birth but is too small it is not considered a child.  While the US counts any child birthed no matter how small our light it was.

The US ranks 50th for life expectancy.

As far as healthcare goes, US healthcare is notoriously poor for a wealthy country, most Western European countries have far better healthcare. I am not sure where this major illness thing comes from, but Western European countries are most definitely better places to be no matter what the ailment.

What the US does is they often compare their healthcare system to Canada's. Canada does not equate to Europe.

Murder in the US is high, but that is 17,000 per year, but that is out of 2,500,000 deaths per year, most of which from heart disease, strokes, and cancer.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

im_sneaky on 19 October 2009

If someone is 6"1 and 143 pounds, they are very thin, but honestly only need to hit the gym if they really want to. That's the thing about life, people can do more or less what they want. A lot of people start working out, get buff, and then criticize others for not being buff. Some people just don't use their physical body for any exercise, and if they do, that's their choice. They are probably doing something else that you may or may not be missing out on.



 

 

Around the Network
d21lewis on 19 October 2009

Wii Fit just likes to put you down so that it can build you up. It told me I was ugly, I dressed funny, and I needed a haircut. And, you know what? I got that haircut. Thanks, Wii Fit!





Actually, I don't even have Wii Fit. I just wanted to fit in.

*leaves thread*



xbebop on 19 October 2009

I'm 5'11 and 134 pounds. I doubt it would say I'm overweight. =P