Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/16/2013 5:58:44 AM PDT by Deadeye Division
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
To: Deadeye Division

He should just say he’s gay.


2 posted on 07/16/2013 5:59:27 AM PDT by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheel barrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Apparently the “New” scouts aren’t into plumpers. Lucky kids.


3 posted on 07/16/2013 6:01:01 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division
"they had to carry their heavy packs"

What? No Whambulances?


5 posted on 07/16/2013 6:03:04 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Appears to be discrimination to me. Fat Folks unite with a lawsuit.


6 posted on 07/16/2013 6:07:46 AM PDT by dforest (I have now entered the Twilight Zone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division
Obese by BMI standards:(not the white kid :) )
7 posted on 07/16/2013 6:09:51 AM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Just realized it was 40+ BMI. I take back my previous post.


8 posted on 07/16/2013 6:10:37 AM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Isn’t obesity a protected class now?

I see another discrimination lawsuit on the horizon...


12 posted on 07/16/2013 6:21:58 AM PDT by moovova
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division
Top 10 Reasons Why The BMI Is Bogus

1. The person who dreamed up the BMI said explicitly that it could not and should not be used to indicate the level of fatness in an individual.

The BMI was introduced in the early 19th century by a Belgian named Lambert Adolphe Jacques Quetelet. He was a mathematician, not a physician. He produced the formula to give a quick and easy way to measure the degree of obesity of the general population to assist the government in allocating resources. In other words, it is a 200-year-old hack.

2. It is scientifically nonsensical.

There is no physiological reason to square a person's height (Quetelet had to square the height to get a formula that matched the overall data. If you can't fix the data, rig the formula!). Moreover, it ignores waist size, which is a clear indicator of obesity level.

3. It is physiologically wrong.

It makes no allowance for the relative proportions of bone, muscle and fat in the body. But bone is denser than muscle and twice as dense as fat, so a person with strong bones, good muscle tone and low fat will have a high BMI. Thus, athletes and fit, health-conscious movie stars who work out a lot tend to find themselves classified as overweight or even obese.

4. It gets the logic wrong.

The CDC says on its Web site that "the BMI is a reliable indicator of body fatness for people." This is a fundamental error of logic. For example, if I tell you my birthday present is a bicycle, you can conclude that my present has wheels. That's correct logic. But it does not work the other way round. If I tell you my birthday present has wheels, you cannot conclude I got a bicycle. I could have received a car. Because of how Quetelet came up with it, if a person is fat or obese, he or she will have a high BMI. But as with my birthday present, it doesn't work the other way round. A high BMI does not mean an individual is even overweight, let alone obese. It could mean the person is fit and healthy, with very little fat.

5. It's bad statistics.

Because the majority of people today (and in Quetelet's time) lead fairly sedentary lives and are not particularly active, the formula tacitly assumes low muscle mass and high relative fat content. It applies moderately well when applied to such people because it was formulated by focusing on them. But it gives exactly the wrong answer for a large and significant section of the population, namely the lean, fit and healthy. Quetelet is also the person who came up with the idea of "the average man." That's a useful concept, but if you try to apply it to any one person, you come up with the absurdity of a person with 2.4 children. Averages measure entire populations and often don't apply to individuals.

6. It is lying by scientific authority.

Because the BMI is a single number between 1 and 100 (like a percentage) that comes from a mathematical formula, it carries an air of scientific authority. But it is mathematical snake oil.

7. It suggests there are distinct categories of underweight, ideal, overweight and obese, with sharp boundaries that hinge on a decimal place.

That's total nonsense.

8. It makes the more cynical members of society suspect that the medical insurance industry lobbies for the continued use of the BMI to keep their profits high.

Insurance companies sometimes charge higher premiums for people with a high BMI. Among such people are all those fit individuals with good bone and muscle and little fat, who will live long, healthy lives during which they will have to pay those greater premiums.

9. Continued reliance on the BMI means doctors don't feel the need to use one of the more scientifically sound methods that are available to measure obesity levels.

Those alternatives cost a little bit more, but they give far more reliable results.

10. It embarrasses the U.S. It is embarrassing for one of the most scientifically, technologically and medicinally advanced nations in the world to base advice on how to prevent one of the leading causes of poor health and premature death (obesity) on a 200-year-old numerical hack developed by a mathematician who was not even an expert in what little was known about the human body back then.

14 posted on 07/16/2013 6:27:41 AM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

That’s right, Obama threw the Scouts out of A.P. Hill, didn’t he!


16 posted on 07/16/2013 6:28:41 AM PDT by Redleg Duke ("Madison, Wisconsin is 30 square miles surrounded by reality.", L. S. Dryfus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Now that the gays have gotten their way they want to discriminate against everybody else.


17 posted on 07/16/2013 6:30:59 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Who knew that one day professional wrestling would be less fake than professional journalism?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division
I guess this rule of Scouting is out


19 posted on 07/16/2013 6:33:52 AM PDT by JRios1968 (I'm guttery and trashy, with a hint of lemon. - Laz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

So we cavemen go through all the trouble of inventing camping, cooking food over an open fire, and now you call this progress? What do you think, Fred?


22 posted on 07/16/2013 6:46:47 AM PDT by P.O.E. (Pray for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Fatty boys - Get out of the tent.

Homo boys - Get in the tent.


23 posted on 07/16/2013 6:50:48 AM PDT by Iron Munro (The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

But if the boy claims to fancy other boys he gets in as the honor scout.


25 posted on 07/16/2013 6:53:34 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Homosexual adult leaders don’t like fat boys.


26 posted on 07/16/2013 6:54:44 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Butt sex fits the Boy Scouts new “healthy sustainable” life standards to attend the crambor...er, jamboree.

Being a little chubby does nor fit the guidelines.

Boy Scouts have become a joke.


27 posted on 07/16/2013 6:57:42 AM PDT by dforest (I have now entered the Twilight Zone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

If you’re fat, it’s a big no. If you stick your d*ck in other boys’ asses, come on in!


28 posted on 07/16/2013 7:10:42 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division
I guess the newly declared subsidiary of NAMBLA likes ‘em on the *lean* side...wink,wink...grin,grin!
29 posted on 07/16/2013 7:15:39 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (The Civil Servants Are No Longer Servants...Or Civil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

I wonder if the Boy Scouts might have recently developed a secret “handshake”.Inquiring minds want to know.


30 posted on 07/16/2013 7:17:01 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (The Civil Servants Are No Longer Servants...Or Civil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Deadeye Division

Local Scout leaders should be working together with parents of Scouts who have a weight problem to help them lose a few pounds before time for the Jamboree, instead of playing along all year and then having to exclude them because of the Jamboree standards.


35 posted on 07/16/2013 9:57:04 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson