If you truly boil out correlative issues -- like links between unhealthy diets and obesity, or between unhealthily low activity levels and obesity -- then we're effectively comparing two people with identical direct health metrics (whatever they may be -- activity, blood chemistry, whatever).
In such a comparison, it seems intuitive to me that -- all other metrics being equal -- the person with (a) greater energy reserves, and (b) better genetic/dietary resiliance to body fat in general would naturally be better off for both contracting and fighting off some diseases. Again, all other things being equal, it makes perfect sense to me that a person with higher body fat would be far better off in most cases.
I think what limits the applicability of this tho to (sadly) only the few folks who are very educated on the topic is the fact that "all other things being equal" is perhaps the exception and not the rule for most Americans. Many people probably just (wrongfully) assume that obesity is the indicator of some other health problem; that may be true more often than not, but the point is that people (including some doctors) don't realize that it's not always true.
For completeness, my understanding is that there are a few diseases where greater body fat simply makes the disease more risky just from a body-chemistry standpoint -- but my source is only secondary and may be part of the biased world. Diabetes is the example i've heard about; something about higher body fat making sugar levels harder to regulate simply for chemical reasons, all other things being equal. Does that match your research?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-02-07 09:58 pm (UTC)If you truly boil out correlative issues -- like links between unhealthy diets and obesity, or between unhealthily low activity levels and obesity -- then we're effectively comparing two people with identical direct health metrics (whatever they may be -- activity, blood chemistry, whatever).
In such a comparison, it seems intuitive to me that -- all other metrics being equal -- the person with (a) greater energy reserves, and (b) better genetic/dietary resiliance to body fat in general would naturally be better off for both contracting and fighting off some diseases. Again, all other things being equal, it makes perfect sense to me that a person with higher body fat would be far better off in most cases.
I think what limits the applicability of this tho to (sadly) only the few folks who are very educated on the topic is the fact that "all other things being equal" is perhaps the exception and not the rule for most Americans. Many people probably just (wrongfully) assume that obesity is the indicator of some other health problem; that may be true more often than not, but the point is that people (including some doctors) don't realize that it's not always true.
For completeness, my understanding is that there are a few diseases where greater body fat simply makes the disease more risky just from a body-chemistry standpoint -- but my source is only secondary and may be part of the biased world. Diabetes is the example i've heard about; something about higher body fat making sugar levels harder to regulate simply for chemical reasons, all other things being equal. Does that match your research?