# Thoughts on the 'winner effect' and obesity



## Tad (Aug 12, 2008)

On average academy award winners live a few years longer (total lifespan) than academy award nominees who dont win. British civil servants paid in the top quintile (20%) of the civil service live noticeably longer than those in the second quintile. All of those actors are generally quite successful, all of those civil servants are paid well and live in a country with mostly public health care. In other words, the difference cannot be explained as simply a case of being wealthier allows access to better food and health care, there is something else going on. Similar effects have been seen in analyzing a lot of other data, doing tests on rats, and so on. At least, according to a radio documentary I heard, so I dont have foot notes pointing to the original studies, sorry.

Now, one possibility is that at some level we choose people who are in better health, or show some hints, somehow, of fundamentally more robust nature, as natural winners. We vote for them, promote them, and so on. So that the naturally healthier end up winning more. This seems unlikely to explain all of the differences, as nobody has ever been able to show that people can pick people in this way. If we could do it well enough to show years differences in lifespan youd think wed be able to show it in some other areas.

One know effect which may explain some of this difference is that stress over which we dont have control is rough on the body. There are a variety of effects caused by the hormones we release in these situations, ranging from being more apt to store fat in the abdominal cavity through higher levels of inflammation along with other effects. It is possible that losing an academy award really adds to your stress levels, or that winning one really relieves them, but it seems hard to imagine that it makes such a difference to average out to years of difference. The civil service might be a different issue, where those in the middle take on a lot of stress quite possibly, so it might explain things there better.

There is also a possibility that there is a winner effect, which we havent really figured out yet. That is, that merely being on top in some way is beneficial to our health, resulting in a longer life. This makes a certain amount of evolutionary sense, as having winners around longer to breed and to take care of mates or offspring seems like it might be useful. However nobody that Ive heard of has managed to show a mechanism by which such an effect would take place.

Whatever the causes, I have to wonder if this could account for some of the increased morbidity numbers measured amongst fat folks. In a society which frequently abuses those who are fat, which dumps stresses on them in the form of chiding messages which they cant control, which is less apt to promote them to positions of power and control, and which generally weights things against them more often than not, might this winners longevity effect show shortened lifespan simply because of these effects, totally aside from any impact of being fat?

Im not claiming that being fat has no impact, because on several conditions at least it clearly does. But many of those same conditions also respond to stress, amongst other things. So I have to wonder how many people would find their symptoms declined if they were less stressed? And how much of that stress has to do with their weight?

Just something Ive been wondering about lately.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Aug 12, 2008)

Ed, I think it's a fascinating premise but very challenging to corroborate. There are so many variables impinging on mortality a definitive regression analysis would be almost impossible. One factor I'd be curious about in congruence with the "winner effect" though would be marital status. Marriage is widely recognized as a longevity factor, especially for men. Could success be a "setting event" for lasting marriages? 

Obesity is clearly one obstacle to success in our culture but the nature of success is that it inherently offers barriers. Part of the measure of success is whether one has overcome challenges. The attitude that allows some to surmount obstacles when others succumb to circumstances may support a healthier immune system and reduce the ravages of stress. My hunch is _quitting_ is what ultimately kills most of us. Stop striving, yearning, feeling and the body senses our resignation. JMO. Good topic for inquiry though. :bow:


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Aug 12, 2008)

Longevity is not necessarily a measure of good health; ask anyone who works in a nursing home. Perhaps there is some celestial court in which those who enjoy conspicuous success are required to pay for it by serving a longer sentence.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Aug 13, 2008)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> Longevity is not necessarily a measure of good health; ask anyone who works in a nursing home. Perhaps there is some celestial court in which those who enjoy conspicuous success are required to pay for it by serving a longer sentence.



Wouldn't disagree at all there Doc. How many times we twirl around the sun is just a simple way of keeping score; surely not definitive of much at all. _Fulfillment_ is so damned hard to compare though. Love, laughter, friends, freedom - so many things we might be better served to track than birthdays. Maybe the world would focus less on weight and more on happiness if health were about the quality of our years instead of the quantity? Nah!  :doh:


----------



## imfree (Aug 13, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Wouldn't disagree at all there Doc. How many times we twirl around the sun is just a simple way of keeping score; surely not definitive of much at all. _Fulfillment_ is so damned hard to compare though. Love, laughter, friends, freedom - so many things we might be better served to track than birthdays. Maybe the world would focus less on weight and more on happiness if health were about the quality of our years instead of the quantity? Nah!  :doh:




Sorry the system won't let me rep you, Ernest. i've 
often used that quote, "Life is not to be measured 
in moments taking breath, but it should rather be 
measured in breathtaking moments"!


----------



## olwen (Aug 14, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Wouldn't disagree at all there Doc. How many times we twirl around the sun is just a simple way of keeping score; surely not definitive of much at all. _Fulfillment_ is so damned hard to compare though. Love, laughter, friends, freedom - so many things we might be better served to track than birthdays. Maybe the world would focus less on weight and more on happiness if health were about the quality of our years instead of the quantity? Nah!  :doh:



Makes total sense to me. I remember seeing a picture a long time ago of a himalayan monk who was over 90 years old who didn't look a day over 30. No wrinkles, no liver spots, no dryness no nothing. He looked like the picture of health. I don't remember the context of the pic, but I remember that pic. I thought well, he must be content. Contented living has kept him so youthful. Whatever it is monks do has made him happy. 

I meditate every so often and I notice that when I meditate about a certain place I always feel energized afterwards. I wake up refreshed and feeling good and ready to start the day, euphoric almost. I think that true spiritual center that monk had kept him so healthy. 

Also I saw a science program a while ago about aging. Telomeres apparently determine how fast we age since they have something to do with chromosomal replication. They seem to have a cell division limit and every decade they loose a division so to speak. Perhaps that reenergizing affect I get when I meditate sometimes might make the telomeres last longer, like if I did that regularly maybe the cell division limit would stretch to every twenty years instead of every ten. Whatever we all do to reenergize then would give our cells a battery charge and make them last longer. So if that means contentment from winning an award or having a job you enjoy or having a family or mediating or a satisfying relationship or laughing, or whatever then we should probably all make a better effort to alleviate stress by having those contented moments.

Just my thoughts.


----------



## TallFatSue (Aug 19, 2008)

In my case at least, methinx any potential health risks of obesity are probably more than offset by having a generally positive attitude. It also helps that I have a strong happy marriage, rewarding career, financial stability etc. So for most of my life I've felt like a winner (hopefully without being too vain about it  ) and that probably has a beneficial effect on my health. 

The simple fact that I'm so fat probably makes me want to keep a closer watch on my health than the average person. I have regular checkups which help me nip any potential problems in the bud. My doctor agrees that a positive attitude works wonders. She says I'm healthier than many of her thin patients who assume they're healthy simply because they're thin and therefore abuse their bodies. I must be doing something right.


----------

