Oh, enough.

I don’t tend to wander into political issues here, but after reading this article, I couldn’t resist.

Obesity Contributes to Global Warming.

Oh, for crying out loud. Frankly, I’m not all that sure that global warming is a real phenomenon. (Folks who suffered through our recent winter here in the upper midwest can attest that a bit of global warming would have been welcome, thank you.) And I absolutely believe that we should make every effort to stem the flow of pollutants and toxic junk that destroy our ecology. (Don’t even get me started on the carbon footprint thing, however.)

The article says,

Obese and overweight people require more fuel to transport them and the food they eat, and the problem will worsen as the population literally swells in size, a team at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine says.

This adds to food shortages and higher energy prices, the school’s researchers Phil Edwards and Ian Roberts wrote in the journal Lancet on Friday.

“We are all becoming heavier and it is a global responsibility,” Edwards said in a telephone interview. “Obesity is a key part of the big picture.”

So now I’m being told that not driving an SUV and reducing my “carbon footprint” aren’t enough. I need to lose the weight I’ve been struggling with all my life in order to save the planet.

You know, if these folks want to be taken seriously, they really need to stop with this kind of…..nonsense. (Another, less polite word comes to mind, but you get the idea.)

They go on:

Because thinner people eat less and are more likely to walk than rely on cars, a slimmer population would lower demand for fuel for transportation and for agriculture, Edwards said.

This is also important because 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions stem from agriculture, he added.

The next step is quantifying how much a heavier population is contributing to climate change, higher fuel prices and food shortages, he added.

“Promotion of a normal distribution of BMI would reduce the global demand for, and thus the price of, food,” Edwards and Roberts wrote.

Unfreakingbelievable. How far is this sort of thinking going to go before it becomes truly dangerous?

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under Me and mine, Things that make you go, "Hmmm..."

2 responses to “Oh, enough.

  1. Skeleton

    As far as I can tell from what I read these people only reported facts. So what are the part of the idea that you consider “nonsense”? Why don’t you refute it with a logical reason?

  2. Actually, I’m not sure that much of what was reported can be considered factual. While it may be true that more fuel would be required to transport someone enormously heavy (say, over 500 or 600 pounds) most people do not fall into that category. Someone who is clinically overweight has a BMI of 25-29.9. That means that someone 5 feet tall weighing 135 pounds is clinically overweight. Can you really tell me that transporting someone of that size will cost more than someone who is clinically of normal weight – but is 6 feet tall?

    As for thinner people eating less, that’s based more on generalizations than fact, as well. While many people are heavier because they eat more, many are heavier not because they eat more but because they move less. Additionally, there are many thin folks with the kind of metabolic systems that allow them to eat much more and maintain their body weight – especially if they are athletes.

    Frankly, I think the entire argument is specious, at best.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s