Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obesity as a cause of global warming?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
mvccd1000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:19 AM
Original message
Obesity as a cause of global warming?
Saw this on google news; there were several reports, I just happened to click on the LA Times.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster_shots/2008/05/what-shall-we-b.html

Obesity as a cause of global warming?
4:48 PM, May 16, 2008

That pesky obesity thing. First it forced Disneyland to increase the sizes of its theme-park costumes, and hospitals to buy larger hoists and beds. Now, in a letter published Friday in the medical journal Lancet, two scientists write that obese people are disproportionately responsible for high food prices and greenhouse gas emissions because they consume 18% more food energy due to their greater body mass -- and require increased quantities of fuel to transport themselves and the food they eat. "Promotion of a normal distribution of BMI would reduce the global demand for, and thus the price of, food," write the authors, Phil Edwards and Ian Roberts of the evocatively named London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

(More at the link, including several nice rebuttals.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. Oh, yay
More demonization of the fat. I couldn't get through a day without it! :mad:

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varelse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. This should be fun...
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
3. overconsumption of any form is a *factor* in GW
not a *cause*. It seems to me, though, that this is so insigificant compared to other sources as not to be worthy of consideration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
4. I so wish they'd focus more on what corporations are doing to further global warming.
And also how they can help make solutions to curb it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. Why don't you look to the largest polluter on the planet, they burn
enough fuel to keep several alien planets going, and all this while chasing their tail.


http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0327-21.htm
Published on Sunday, March 27, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
Military Pollution:
The Quintessential Universal Soldier
by Lucinda Marshall

As children, we were taught that the military protected us in times of war. We learned about soldiers being killed and wounded by 'the enemy', and how people died if they got shot or if a bomb landed on them. Sometimes innocent people got killed during a war, but the fact that most victims were civilians was carefully hidden from us by our elders. They knew that children are smart enough to understand that there is a big moral difference between killing other soldiers and killing ordinary people. That a significant number of deaths were caused not by a weapon's impact, but by its toxicity and by military pollution, was never mentioned.

We did not learn that military toxins know no boundaries, that they don't just kill the enemy, they kill our military personnel and people living near military bases, that they pollute the water, land and air. We were not taught and still aren't told today that military toxins go anywhere and kill everything, that they are in fact the quintessential universal soldier.

We Have Met The Enemy

The U.S. Department of Defense is the largest polluter in the world, producing more hazardous waste than the five largest U.S. chemical companies combined. (1) The types of hazardous wastes used by the military include pesticides and defoliants like Agent Orange. It includes solvents, petroleum, perchlorate (a component of rocket fuel) lead and mercury. And most ominously, depleted uranium.

The health problems that have been documented as being attributable to these various toxins in military use include miscarriages, low birth weight, birth defects, kidney disease and cancer. Military pollution most directly affects those who are targeted by our weapons, soldiers and anyone living near a military base, both in the U.S. and abroad. In the U.S., one out of every ten Americans lives within ten miles of a military site that has been listed as a Superfund priority cleanup site. (2)

Given where chemical and nuclear weapons are used, tested, manufactured, stored and disposed of, the burden of health impacts and environmental destruction falls disproportionately on poorer communities, people of color and indigenous communities. Women face particularly severe problems because of their sensitive reproductive tissues and children because their immune systems are not yet fully developed. (3)

Way Off Base

The number of health problems and environmental problems that have been reported near military installations throughout the world is truly staggering. The following are only a few of the many examples.

The U.S. Navy is the largest polluter in the San Diego, California area, having created 100 toxic sites during the last 80 years. Environmental damage caused by the Navy includes spilling over 11,000 gallons of oil into the San Diego Bay in 1988. Fish in the Bay contain high levels of mercury and radioactive compounds that are attributable to Navy pollution of the Bay. (4)

Near the Naval Air Station in Fallon, NV high rates of cancer and rare diseases have probably been linked to the dumping of jet fuel, radio and electronic emissions and the contamination of groundwater with radioactive materials. Fallon has the highest per capita rate of childhood leukemia in the nation. (5)

It is important to note that the contamination of military bases is also a problem overseas where significant toxic pollution has impacted the areas near U.S. military bases in countries such as South Korea, the Philippines and Panama.

Pollution from the manufacturing of military weapons is equally horrific. The soil near a plant that manufactured depleted uranium rounds in Colonie, New York was found to have 500 times the amount of uranium that one could normally expect to find in soil. (6)

Military waste disposal sites also pose significant problems. Recently, evidence of contamination from the Diamond Alkali plant which manufactured Agent Orange that was used in Vietnam was found in the Newark Bay in New Jersey. Bottom dwellers in the Bay contain the highest levels of dioxins ever recorded in aquatic animals, high enough to guarantee cancer at the same levels in humans. Many low income, immigrant and homeless residents of the area rely on the Bay for subsistence fishing and thus face the considerable risks of exposure and ingestion of Agent Orange. (7)

At Rocky Flats, a former nuclear weapons plant site in Colorado, Jon Lipsky, a former FBI agent, has recently come forward to expose the contamination of the land that he says the EPA and FBI and Department of Justice are suppressing. Lipsky and other plaintiffs in a case against the DOJ are concerned about plans to turn Rocky Flats into a wildlife refuge without adequately cleaning up the contamination. As Lipsky and others point out, disguising a toxic dump as a tourist attraction to be visited by schoolchildren is unacceptable. (8)

The cleanup of sites such as these have slowed considerably since President George W. Bush took office. EPA inspections at military sites have dropped by 10%. The number of fines has dropped by 25% and the dollar amount of fines has been smaller. Overall spending on the cleanup of military sites has dropped 20% since 2001. Military spending on the cleanup of hazardous sites amounts to only 1% of the military budget. (9)

As is the case with many pollutants, the effects of perchlorate, a toxic rocket fuel component, knows no bounds. New research has found perchlorate, in women's breast milk in eighteen states. It can also be found in ground water, crops such as lettuce and dairy milk. Perchlorate can cause mental retardation, loss of hearing and speech and motor skill problems. (10) Like other pollutants that are now finding their way into breastmilk, perchlorate puts mothers in the untenable position of simultaneously nurturing and (many times unknowingly) poisoning their children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvccd1000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yeah, but they don't have a lot of fat people.
Kidding..... just trying to steer this back towards the topic at hand. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. Alrighty then, let's do something constructive here.... it is a given that
Edited on Sun May-18-08 10:47 AM by 4MoronicYears
obesity can add to our problems, but the people dealing with it should be our FIRST concern.

http://www.lef.org/protocols/metabolic_health/obesity_01.htm <--- much much more good info at link.

At the 2004 meeting of the American Diabetes Association (Orlando, Florida), results of two studies using PGX fiber blend were presented by researchers from the Risk Factor Modification Centre at St. Michael's Hospital and the University of Toronto (Vuksan et al 2004):

* Study participants who took 3 g of the fiber blend had a 65 percent reduction in post-meal glucose elevation after consuming a 50-gram acute glucose challenge.
* Study participants who took 3 g of the fiber blend (three times a day, before meals) had a 23 percent reduction in post-meal glucose, a 40 percent reduction in post-meal insulin release, and a 55.9 percent improvement in whole-body insulin sensitivity scores.
* Study participants taking the fiber blend reduced body fat by 2.8 percent from baseline by the end of the three-week study period.

Optimal weight-loss benefits occurred when six PGX capsules were taken before meals, although some studies indicate as few as two capsules might produce some results (Vuksan et al 2004).

An advantage of PGX is that its benefits may be obtained by swallowing capsules, which usually do not cause intestinal distress. However, to induce early satiety, drinking a soluble powder mix before meals is preferable to swallowing capsules.

The typical dose for soluble fiber drink mix is 8 to12 g taken before meals. Begin with only 4 g before each meal for the first week or two to allow your digestive system to adjust to higher fiber intake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
8. Doesn't their lower activity and shorter life span partially offset this?
True, the basal metabolism is weight-dependent. But the obese tend to be less active so total metabolism is less than would be indicated by their added weight.

Furthermore, they have shorter lives, which further reduces life-time food consumption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
La Lioness Priyanka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
9. bull fucking shit. yes, i understand an obese person eats more than a skinny person
but all you tall people, eat more than me. men eat and weigh more than women.

do you think if we removed cars, planes, helicopters, electricity, etc obese people would continue to harm the environment?

according to this study only tiny people like myself should exist.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
10. I'll bet that obesity would not be a major concern
if food producers and processors were sending all healthy foods to grocery stores, restaurants, etc..

You know. No sugars. No refined flours. Fresh, organic, free-range, and wholesome.

Yet global warming would still be with us.

Let's see...what is the single thing all people could choose to do, regardless of the source of the energy we're using?

Take personal responsibility for zero population growth this year, and reducing human population in the coming years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
11. silly
How about having a child? That's a lot more than an 18% increase. Why not just say having children causes global warming?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
12. I'd counter with overpopulation
Six skinny people use more than one fat one and the skinny six will likely have more kids than the fat one.

We have to find the way to limit population growth in this world. There has to be some limit at some level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
13. This is looney tunes. The problem is overpopulation. Period.
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-18-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
14. Its actually all those dairy cows in Wisconsin
that are accelerating global warming. (They pass a lot of gas.) :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC