Bits of the article in 2005. The CDC are the same folks that state 400,000 die from smoking.

http://www.data-yard.net/10b2/luik_tech_cs.htm

Whoppers and the End of an Epidemic

But in a study released this week by the CDC and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association ("Excess Deaths Associated with Underweight, Overweight, and Obesity"), the public health community has finally owned up to their massive fib by acknowledging that the number of deaths due to obesity in the US is closer to 26,000 not 400,000 as previously reported.


Apart from this huge downward revision in the numbers of people supposedly dying from fat, there are several things in this study which signal the end of any legitimate linkage between obesity and premature death. First, for the merely overweight with BMI's from 25-30 there is no excess mortality. In fact, being overweight was "associated with a slight reduction in mortality relative to the normal weight category." Being overweight not only does not lead to premature death, something that dozens of other studies from around the world have been saying for the last 30 years, but it also carries less risk from premature death than being "normal" weight. In other words the overweight=early death "fact" proclaimed by the public health community is simply not true.



Second, for individuals aged 25-59 the risks of premature death from being underweight are substantially greater than those of being overweight and they are also slightly greater than those of being obese. For those aged 60-69 the risk of dying from being underweight is much higher than from being even significantly obese, that is with a BMI > 35. Again, the total number of premature deaths due to obesity is 25, 814, while the mortality attributable to being underweight is 37, 746.

If anything this points to an epidemic of not fat but thin caused death.

Third, the increased mortality risks from obesity were concentrated in a small sub-section of the population, the morbidly obese (BMI>35), who comprise only 8% of Americans. Yet the obesity hysteria of the public health establishment consistently tells us that 65% of Americans are overweight and headed to an early death.

Being a '10' might be nice; but,being a '34' is much better!!

http://www.obesityscam.com/myth2.11.htm

"The minimum mortality [for women over 50] occurred at a BMI of approximately 34."
—Journal of Women’s Health, 1998

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/10/obesity-par...-9-fat-on-brain.html

As we get on in years, cognitive decline is one of the most feared conditions. Dementia is incapacitating and leads to functional decline and can devastate the quality of life for its victims and their families.

Research led by Dr. Maureen T. Sturman, M.D., MPH, at the Rush Institute for Healthy Aging, set out to find the relationship between obesity among seniors and cognitive decline.

The results were not what the researchers appear to have expected.
They used information on 3,885 Black and Caucasian participants in the Chicago Health and Aging Project, which followed seniors living in the community in the south side of Chicago from 1993 to 2003. Every three years, the seniors were interviewed, medical histories taken, and cognitive assessments done, using four tests (Mini-Mental State Examination, the East Boston Tests of Immediate Memory and Delayed Recall; and the Symbol Digit Modalities Test). Dr. Sturman’s team found a significant relationship between underweight and cognitive decline over time.

In comparison, there was lower cognitive decline among overweight and obese people, with each increase in BMI associated with less cognitive decline.

Did the CDC ever come up with a new cause of death for those 375,000 dead people?

That was a lot of deaths to get wrong. I wonder if they've ever made other mistakes?

quote:

That was a lot of deaths to get wrong. I wonder if they've ever made other mistakes?

Well, if they would ever again look at deaths due to smoking, here is some info that they might consider.

1.The study appears in the Feb. 14 issue of the American Heart Association journal 'Circulation', to my knowledge, the AHA would not knowingly publish a study that was full of incorrect data; thus the AHA has endorsed this study.

2.This study finds: "Smokers and nonsmokers had similar lifetime risks for cardiovascular disease".

NOTE: If smoking is not a lifetime risk factor for 'cardiovascular disease', exposure to tiny amounts of SHS is definitely not a risk factor for 'cardiovascular disease'.
So says the AHA.

3.This study states : "but smokers developed cardiovascular problems earlier in life and died an average of five years sooner".

Note: http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/brfss/age.asp?yr=2006&state=US&qkey=4394&grp=0

If you take the %'s here and the numbers of people in each age group, you would find that the average age of smokers(about 42 years old) is about 5 years less than the average age of non-smokers(about 47.5 years).

Since Smokers are,on average 5 years younger, Smokers,on average, will develop all problems about 5 years earlier in life and of course they are 5 years,on average, younger at death!

Gary K.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184016,00.html
First Lifetime Heart Disease Risk Assessment Developed
Monday, February 06, 2006

By Salynn Boyles

The study appears in the Feb. 14 issue of the American Heart Association journal 'Circulation'.

The first-ever comprehensive lifetime risk assessment for cardiovascular disease highlights the importance of reducing risk early in life to prevent heart and vascular disease later on.

Cardiovascular disease events included heart attack, angina, coronary heart disease, stroke, and claudication (peripheral arterial disease).

Lloyd-Jones and colleagues from Northwestern University used data from the Framingham Heart Study, which has followed thousands of people for decades, to calculate lifetime cardiovascular risk among 50-year-olds.

The researchers reviewed the medical records of 3,564 men and 4,362 women who did not have any record of cardiovascular disease at age 50. The men and women were followed for several decades and all cases of heart attack, coronary heart disease, angina, stroke, claudication (pain in the legs caused by circulation problems), and death from cardiovascular disease were recorded.

Smokers and nonsmokers had similar lifetime risks for cardiovascular disease, but smokers developed cardiovascular problems earlier in life and died an average of five years sooner.

SOURCES: Lloyd-Jones, D.M. Circulation, Feb. 14, 2006, vol. 113: online. Donald M. Lloyd-Jones, MD, ScM, department of preventive medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago. Jorge Plutzky, MD, director, vascular disease prevention program, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston.

quote:

Originally posted by gkayser30:
...to my knowledge, the AHA would not knowingly publish a study that was full of incorrect data; thus the AHA has endorsed this study.

I wouldn't be too sure about that. I'd have to look, but I think they've published a lot of Glantz's crap.

quote:

If you take the %'s here and the numbers of people in each age group, you would find that the average age of smokers(about 42 years old) is about 5 years less than the average age of non-smokers(about 47.5 years).

Could you tell me where you see this? If this is the CDC link, all I see are age groups and smoking status broken into 4 groups. I don't see numbers of people.

"--Smokers and nonsmokers had similar lifetime risks for cardiovascular disease, but smokers developed cardiovascular problems earlier in life and died an average of five years sooner. The researchers note that this might be due to other smoking-related causes such as lung disease and cancer."

What they're saying is they don't know what these people died from. They MIGHT have died from cancer? What kind of study was this?

Well, if smokers aren't dying from cardiovascular problems 5 years earlier, but developing problems 5 years sooner, then the Smoker's Paradox must still be somewhat true with them: Smokers survive heart attacks better than nonsmokers.

quote:

Could you tell me where you see this? If this is the CDC link, all I see are age groups and smoking status broken into 4 groups. I don't see numbers of people.

............
As a general idea, note that there is a much lower % of smokers over 65 as compared to younger age groups. The rest is just tedious math.
Gary K.

Census data from here, you have to do a little math and estimating to get things to come out.
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/STTable?_bm=y&-geo...me=ACS_2006_EST_G00_

quote:

Originally posted by gkayser30:
...to my knowledge, the AHA would not knowingly publish a study that was full of incorrect data; thus the AHA has endorsed this study.

I wouldn't be too sure about that. I'd have to look, but I think they've published a lot of Glantz's crap.

...................
I should have said: "the AHA would not knowingly publish a study that was full of incorrect data; that did not agree with their agenda."
......................
Glantz's crap confirms their agenda driven propaganda.

quote:

Originally posted by gkayser30:
I should have said: "the AHA would not knowingly publish a study that was full of incorrect data; that did not agree with their agenda."
......................
Glantz's crap confirms their agenda driven propaganda.

I knew something was wrong. I didn't think you were naive.

As far as the age thing, if they were comparing different ages they're most certainly wrong. But the guy who said smokers experience no additional risk, but still die 5 years earlier, sounds like he was looking at apples to apples.

And the CDC, which just came out and had to do some PR work on why their AIDS estimates are way off; has had to revise their obesity deaths from way high to way low; still maintains that smoking knocks 13.5 years off men and 14.2 years off women. And people will still believe them.

quote:

Smokers and nonsmokers had similar lifetime risks for cardiovascular disease, but smokers developed cardiovascular problems earlier in life and died an average of five years sooner.

............................
Squeezer:
"but still die 5 years earlier, sounds like he was looking at apples to apples."
......................
There is no mention of the age of CVD problems and the average death(all causes, does not say cause of deaths?) was 5 years sooner, this is what will happen if you are comparing two groups with about a 5 year difference in the average age.

In other words,this says nothing about smoking and CVD other than the risk is about the same for smokers and non-smokers.
Gary K.

quote:

And the CDC, which just came out and had to do some PR work on why their AIDS estimates are way off; has had to revise their obesity deaths from way high to way low; still maintains that smoking knocks 13.5 years off men and 14.2 years off women. And people will still believe them.

..................

I truly believe that the anti smoker groups forced the CDC to back off on the obesity numbers.

Since they can not get much propaganda about the health hazard of second hand exposure to obesity,there would be too much lost revenue if smoking was only #2!!

There is just too much money to be made from smoking.

There would be less acceptance of bans and higher taxes on cigarettes and few would listen to them.

quote:

Originally posted by gkayser30:
I truly believe that the anti smoker groups forced the CDC to back off on the obesity numbers.

That's who made the stink about it. That's true. But I can't see the anti-obesity people at CDC allowing themselves to look that incompetent just for the anti-smoker wing of the CDC.

I have no doubt they cook the books just as much as the anti-smoker wing at CDC. They were just outed, that's all.

Public Health. It's a Dog Eat Dog World. LOL