# What a time to be alive as an FA



## Tad (Jun 12, 2017)

Apparently nearly one third of the world's population is now overweight or obese.

Of course, the report I saw focused on possible health issues, and I'm sure that some of that is real, and that is a problem. But for the moment just looking from the perspective of someone who loves being around other fat people:

- 2.2 billion overweight people in 2015
- Obesity rate predicted to reach 20% by 2025

those are pretty amazing numbers!

report

study summary


----------



## squeezablysoft (Jun 12, 2017)

As an American FFA in the early 21st century I am indeed a fortunate soul.  One can hardly step outside one's home without being surrounded by sexy squishy softness everywhere.


----------



## agouderia (Jun 13, 2017)

That survey tells us nothing new.
It's all over all papers internationally, but it is nothing but a medically framed case of fat-bashing.

90% of the people in this international "survey" are not 'fat' in the Dims sense, but the over-villified chubbies of a BMI 25-30.

And if you look at the crazy mathematical and statistical tricks they have to pull with a set of totally unsystematic studies and surveys - none of them controlled for statistical significance - to come up with some marginal evidence regarding health effects in that weight range - it's the best example of bias I've seen in a long time.

If this study wasn't about fat, the leprosy of modern times, instead of blindly reporting it, it would have been statistically torn apart.


----------



## TwoSwords (Jun 13, 2017)

Tad said:


> Apparently nearly one third of the world's population is now overweight or obese.
> 
> Of course, the report I saw focused on possible health issues, and I'm sure that some of that is real, and that is a problem. But for the moment just looking from the perspective of someone who loves being around other fat people:
> 
> ...



Sadly, these numbers are a bit misleading, since the definitions of "overweight" and "obese" used by the medical profession have changed over the years in a downward direction.


----------



## Kristal (Jun 13, 2017)

Follow the money. Such studies are funded by the billion dollar diet industry, trolling for new customers. (Ever see a study about under weight people?) 

Sent from my A571VL using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Jun 14, 2017)

Kristal said:


> Follow the money. Such studies are funded by the billion dollar diet industry, trolling for new customers. (Ever see a study about under weight people?)



I've read various estimates of the annual income of the weight-loss industry, ranging from 20 to 50 _billion_ dollars. A large chunk of this money goes for advertising, and the first rule of journalism is: never say anything that might annoy a major advertiser. So, although there may _be_ studies about underweight people, don't expect to see them in the popular press.


----------



## plushkitty (Jun 15, 2017)

Kristal said:


> Follow the money. Such studies are funded by the billion dollar diet industry, trolling for new customers. (Ever see a study about under weight people?)
> 
> Sent from my A571VL using Tapatalk



Hell yes they are. When I was in college, I learned how to read scientific articles and interpret statistics for my major. So during a slow semester when my classes were easier than I thought they would be, I made it my mission to go through the many, many science databases I had access to and find a statistically proven long term method to lose a significant amount of weight. I'm a natural speed reader and I like to stay up late at night; I read a _lot_ of articles.

And there wasn't a single such method to be found.

Oh, there were plenty of articles about obesity. There are entire scientific journals devoted to the subject. The articles, however, would have received a D at best from my biostatistics professor, a "I'm so disappointed in you, I really thought you could do better" face, and an invitation to talk to him during office hours about what the author was doing wrong. And when I looked at who was funding those studies, it was obvious why they were publishing inaccurate dreck. They were mostly funded by corporations with ties to the weight loss industry. Dieting programs, weight loss surgery, weight loss drugs.

The few studies that did not have ties to the weight loss industry came to similar conclusions. Dieting to lose weight is bad for you and will not work long term. What _does_ work to improve the health issues commonly associated with obesity- heart disease, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, type II diabetes- is exercise and nutrition with all the things a body needs to run its systems. Fiber, protein, vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, etc. The amount doesn't matter as much as the contents. Active fat subjects had better health outcomes than sedentary thin subjects.

_That_ was mindblowing. I was still struggling to accept my body at that point in my life. For the science I was building my future career around to tell me that my fat isn't necessarily going to kill me, just pay attention to your blood pressure etc, exercise, eat healthy things along with occasional indulgence and you'll be fine? Amazing.

*steps off of soapbox*


----------



## Blockierer (Jun 15, 2017)

In my fantasy everybody is fat or an (F)FA.


----------



## TwoSwords (Jun 15, 2017)

plushkitty said:


> _That_ was mindblowing. I was still struggling to accept my body at that point in my life. For the science I was building my future career around to tell me that my fat isn't necessarily going to kill me, just pay attention to your blood pressure etc, exercise, eat healthy things along with occasional indulgence and you'll be fine? Amazing.



I'm so glad to hear that others are beginning to discover this through research and evidence. I didn't begin doing leisure time research for this reason, but because I'm not able to appreciate the beauty of thin people, I was strongly motivated to find evidence of whether or not fatness was really as lethal as people say, because for me, it makes a huge difference, in terms of whether and to what degree I can express myself.

What I found, amazingly, was this very confused situation, in the world of statistics, where people repeatedly assume that correlations implied causations, which is, of course, false. A lot of studies will show that obesity is correlated with this or that, but that's not enough to show that it *causes* those conditions, any more than yellow teeth *cause* lung cancer.

Just as yellow teeth and lung cancer correlate, because both are caused by smoking, so obesity and various conditions had a lesser correlation because obesity was a common side effect of people who didn't exercise, ate too much refined sugar, didn't eat the nutrients they needed, put themselves through too much stress, etc... However, that does absolutely nothing to prove that being fat, in isolation from these other factors, is bad for you. There's no evidence at all to show that. In fact, we have good evidence that it may benefit you under certain conditions.

It's been quite a ride, and I'm glad I got on. This is the most wonderful outcome I could have hoped for, aside from the outcome of more people coming to realize this.


----------



## TwoSwords (Jun 15, 2017)

Blockierer said:


> In my fantasy everybody is fat or an (F)FA.



I was planning on doing a story about an isolated place called Cherry Island, which would have that as its background. Really, any story made about such a place, even the most banal of stories, would be captivating and fun, I feel.


----------



## Blockierer (Jun 15, 2017)

TwoSwords said:


> I was planning on doing a story about an isolated place called Cherry Island, which would have that as its background. Really, any story made about such a place, even the most banal of stories, would be captivating and fun, I feel.


Cherry Island is my world. 
Keep me posted.


----------



## plushkitty (Jun 15, 2017)

TwoSwords said:


> What I found, amazingly, was this very confused situation, in the world of statistics, where people repeatedly assume that correlations implied causations, which is, of course, false. A lot of studies will show that obesity is correlated with this or that, but that's not enough to show that it *causes* those conditions, any more than yellow teeth *cause* lung cancer.
> 
> Just as yellow teeth and lung cancer correlate, because both are caused by smoking, so obesity and various conditions had a lesser correlation because obesity was a common side effect of people who didn't exercise, ate too much refined sugar, didn't eat the nutrients they needed, put themselves through too much stress, etc... However, that does absolutely nothing to prove that being fat, in isolation from these other factors, is bad for you. There's no evidence at all to show that. In fact, we have good evidence that it may benefit you under certain conditions.



Yes, exactly! And the hell of it is that the difference between correlation and causation is covered early on in statistics classes. It's one of the first things you learn. Which means that all the so-called scientists and doctors behind the obesity panic are A) letting personal and societal bias overcome their education, B) deliberately skewing their results for profit, and/or C) slept through statistics class and cheated on the tests. 

Bad science irritates me. _Deliberately_ bad science unleashes my inner Hulk.


----------



## landshark (Jun 15, 2017)

I've said it many times and I'll say it again: these studies often use BMI as their metric for determining overweight or obese. Right off the bat the studies are flawed and greatly overstate the extent to which the "problem" exists. If the researchers can't be bothered to use a better metric* then I can't be bothered to waste my time on their report

*to be fair, I've not actually read either of the links, but I have read countless others and the same flaw exists in most of not all of them.


----------



## Tad (Jun 15, 2017)

While I'd posted intending a light-hearted appreciation of living in the age of fat, good points about the horribleness of most 'studies' on this topic.


----------



## BigFA (Jun 16, 2017)

Tad said:


> While I'd posted intending a light-hearted appreciation of living in the age of fat, good points about the horribleness of most 'studies' on this topic.



But I agree with you Tad. Its a wonderful time to be an FA, particularly in the U.S. I too love being able to have the visual pleasure of seeing beautiful fat women everywhere I go. Being in a large city, big beautiful black and Hispanic women are the norm. And middle class suburban housewives in my community seem to be getting fatter every year. I was also at a local pool lately, and was amazed how many massive guys were there over 300 lbs. flaunting their enormous guts. Not to mention all the chubby and fat mothers with their children. Made me actually feel small with my 58" belly.


----------



## Tad (Jun 16, 2017)

Nowhere near that fat around here, but at least these days there is a lot of curvy to chubby, and enough outright fat that on a walk to the neighbourhood shops I'm apt to see someone fat clearly fat (besides the wife and myself).


----------



## TwoSwords (Jun 17, 2017)

plushkitty said:


> Yes, exactly! And the hell of it is that the difference between correlation and causation is covered early on in statistics classes. It's one of the first things you learn. Which means that all the so-called scientists and doctors behind the obesity panic are A) letting personal and societal bias overcome their education, B) deliberately skewing their results for profit, and/or C) slept through statistics class and cheated on the tests.
> 
> Bad science irritates me. _Deliberately_ bad science unleashes my inner Hulk.



It's as prevalent in my favorite field of philosophy as it is in statistics. However, I don't like to assume the worst of people, or to propose conspiracies if there's any other explanation, so my guess would be that...

A. At this point, the assumption that fatness is bad is so much a part of the medical profession, that it's being fed to young doctors like a bottle of milk from the moment they enter medical school. In short, I think the societal bias is foisted upon them during their medical education, even if they don't otherwise have one (and admittedly, some do.)

B. I think many of them may be just inexperienced with logic. Many scientists are not trained in determining whether a logical deduction or an inference to the best explanation is valid or not, and they're used to reading medical papers that make these same mistakes, without reading the responses from philosophers of science. Combined with an uncritical backer, like, as you said, someone in the weight loss industry, who doesn't care much about presenting a very strong case, and a sort of general assumption that fatness is unhealthy, and it leads to the skewing of results. Many of them will be uncomprehending when this is challenged, as if someone had just questioned that 2+3=5. It's just not something they seriously question the evidence for.

C. As I said, I think it may just be that drawing conclusions on the basis of their findings is not their forte. Remember, the job of a scientist is primarily experimentation and measurement. They should really pass their findings off to philosophers; people who are trained in logic and the rules of inference, if they want someone to determine what those findings mean *in practice.*

In short, it's not so much that the science itself is bad (the correlations do exist,) but rather, that the logic being used to interpret those measurements is bad.


----------



## ScouseFA (Jun 17, 2017)

Yeah, also it's summer here so there's a lot more flesh on display and the clothing gets tighter as well. That's just hot.


----------



## bubba350 (Jun 25, 2017)

Tad it is the golden age of bbws every where you look. And as the summer goes on much less clothing with many confident big women who arnt afraid to flaunt it.
So much eye candy. I have to ask the ladies here is it still alright to compliment you.
A genuine compliment not a come on?


----------

