X-Message-Number: 10558
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:41:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ben Best <>
Subject: More on Fitness versus Fatness

On Thu, 09 Oct 1998, Doug Skrecky wrote:

> Abstract:
> 
> Results: After adjustment for age, examination year, cigarette smoking and
> alcohol intake,
                     [snip]

> Conclusions: Unfit men had higher all-cause and CVD mortality than fit men.
> The health benefits of normal weights appear to be limited to men who have
> moderate or high levels of cardiorespiratory fitness. These data suggest
> that the 1995 US weight guidelines may be misleading unless
> cardiorespiratory fitness is taken into account.

          [snip]

>   (from Table 2)  Multivariate Relative Risk of Death
>   BMI                  Fit        Unifit
> 19.0 - <25.0           1.0         2.25
> 25.0 - <27.8           0.96        1.68
> >=27.8 (obese)         1.08        2.24
> 
> Additional comment from the poster:
> 
>   Which is the more important factor affecting mortality rates: fitness or
> fatness?  It looks like fitness is all important, and how fat you are is
> irrelevant. Data from other studies shows that dieters have an elevated
> mortality rate, while for those who exercise it is lower. The medical
> establishment's recommendations to lose weight in whose who are judged to
> be overweight is thus shown to be misguided. Sloth, not fatness kills.

    Although CryoNet does not seem like an appropriate forum for this
debate, I would rather not see these comments pass without reply.

    I question that "other studies show that dieters have an elevated
mortality rate". I am very familiar with the literature and the only 
such studies I can think of are the ones in the early 70s involving 
liquid protein diets of poor quality protein. With modern Very Low Calorie
Diets using high quality protein, the dieters have a lower death rate 
than obese controls. And the blood pressure, diabetes risk and overall
death rate after dieting is much lower than before.

   Douglas offers a false choice of fitness versus fatness. The optimal
choice is fitness AND leanness. The fact that the study above does not
show the lowest mortality for those that are the most fit AND lean
suggests to me that there has been has been no correction for underlying
disease. Studies that correct for underlying disease are few, but there 
has been at least one such large scale study for both men and women 
and both of these studies showed the longest lifespan among those who
were the leannest. One can also suspect other underlying variables 
not corrected for in the above study, such as better dietary habits
among the most fit. 

   Animal experiments are not subject to so many covert variables as
human experiments, and animal experiments on hundreds of species have
shown that 30-50% calorie restriction with adequate nutrition results
in 30-50% extended lifespan. I believe that exercise increases 
well-being, which is why I engage in vigorous aerobic exercise at
least 3 times per week, but there is no evidence from the animal
experiments that it either increases or decreases life span in 
animals who are also calorie resticted with adequate nutrition.

         --------------------------------------------
            Ben Best ()
            http://www.benbest.com/
            ICQ -- http://www.mirabilis.com/20636141

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10558