BlackChampagne.com -- No longer new; improvement also in question.

BlackChampagne Home Buy Crap! I get 5%. Direct donations to cover hosting expenses are also accepted. Site Information --What is Black Champagne? --Cast of Characters & Things --Your First Time. --Design Notes --Quote of the Day Archive --Phrase of the Moment Archive --Site Feedback --Contact/Copyright Info Blog Archives --Blogger Archives: June 2005- --Old Monthly Archives: Jan 2002-May 2005 Reviews Section Movie Reviews (153) Ten Most Recent Film Reviews: --Infernal Affairs -- 5.5 --The Protector/Tom Yum Goong -- 6 --The Limey -- 8 --The Descent -- 6 --Oldboy -- 9.5 --Shaolin Deadly Kicks -- 7 --Mission Impossible III -- 7.5 --V for Vendetta -- 8.5 --Ghost in the Shell 2 -- 8 --Night Watch -- 7.5 Book Reviews (76) Five Most Recent Book Reviews: --Cat People -- 4 --Attack Poodles -- 5 --Caught Stealing -- 6 --The Dirt, by Motley Crue -- 7.5 --Harry Potter #6 -- 7 Photos Section --Flux Photos --Pet Photos (7 pages) --Home Decor Photos --Plant Photos --Vacation Photos (12 pages) Articles See all 234 articles here. Fiction Original horror and fantasy short stories. Mail Bags Index Page Features --Links --Slang: Internet --Slang: Dirty --Slang: Wankisms --Slang: Sex Acts --Slang: Fulldeckisms --Hot or Not? --Truths in Advertising Band Name Ratings (350 Rock Bands Listed) FAQ -- Feedback A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- X -- Y -- Z Hellgate: London --The Unofficial HGL Site --The Hellgate Wiki Diablo II --The Unofficial Site --Flux's Decahedron --Middle Earth Mod
	BlackChampagne -- no longer new; improvement also in question.: Fatter than ever. Friday, April 28, 2006 Fatter than ever. So it turns out that we (meaning, Americans) really are all fat. Who knew? The prevalence of obesity in the US states has been under-estimated by as much as 50 percent, according to a study. In 2002, 28.7 percent of adult American men and 34.5 percent of American women were clinically obese, compared to the conventional estimates for that year of 21.9 percent and 21.2 percent respectively, it says. The research, published in Britain's Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine by Harvard School of Public Health specialists, blames the discrepancy on low-cost data-collection -- and human nature. They say that women were under-reporting their weight, and young men were overestimating. That seems odd, but in retrospect it might be true. I weighed maybe 140-145 from about 15-22 and could not gain weight, no matter what I ate. (I was very physically active too, just not in weight-lifting ways.) And at the time, I always wished I were heavier than I was. I don't recall actually lying about it, but if some nosy health researcher had cornered me, I might have been driven to desperate measures. Using the NHANES to correct the distortions in the broader BRFSS surveys, they found that the incidence of obesity has been greatly under-estimated since 1988, the starting year for the comparison. These corrected figures suggest that true obesity prevalence rose from 16 percent to 28.7 percent from 1988-2002 among men, and from 21.5 percent to 34.5 percent among women. ... Ezzati expressed particular concern for a swathe of southern US states, where more than a third of the adult population is obese. In 2000, Mississippi (31 percent) and Texas (30 percent) had the highest prevalence of obesity in men. That same year, Mississippi (37 percent), Texas (37 percent), Louisiana (37 percent), District of Columbia (37 percent), Alabama (37 percent) and South Carolina (36 percent) had the most incidence of obesity among women. As the article points out, this is just obesity, which corresponds to a BMI of 30+, a level of tonnage is more commonly referred to as "land whale." And yes, that's probably an insult to whales, but I don't invent the definitions, I just apply them cruelly and with a very broad brush (more like a roller, in this case). If you're curious, here's a BMI calculator where you can simulate yourself, gripe about the results, claim it undercounts your substantial muscle mass (which it does), and then add 20 pounds (9 kilos) just to see if that would push you over the "no more cookies, ever" threshold. Labels: obesity Posted by: Flux # 6:10 PM Comments: RE: BMI, it really is quite a simple metric with no allowances for body variation, so use it sparringly. I'm at 24.7 now, but given that I wear the same size pants I did 10 years ago, when I was 25 pounds lighter, and that I go to the gym almost every day and lift a fair amount of weight, I think it's safe to say that I'm not actually on the verge of being overweight, at least in any conventional, non-muscular sense. #: 7:03 PM posted by Flux I hate these things. According to it, I'd have to weigh 100 pounds to be at a BMI of 20 or so. If I weighed 100 pounds, I'd be seriously anorexic. When I was 15, I dieted to get myself down to 105 (that was a size 2 to 3 pants for me), and I felt terrible and faint. My ideal weight is about 118lbs, which according to these BMI things, would put me as seriously overweight. So bogus. I suppose it's a lot better than the old methods, but still very inaccurate since as you said, it gives no allowance for body type/build/structure, only height. #: 12:30 PM posted by Anonymous Ooops, make that 128, not 118, typo. :) At 125lbs I'm still a size 5, which I hardly think is overweight. Now, how good of a physical condition I am in is another story. Haha #: 12:39 PM posted by Anonymous 23.9 BMI = normal weight meh #: 10:57 PM posted by Anonymous Odd, I just typed into the little box and came up with a BMI of 23. While I have lost 40 pounds in the last couple of months, I hardly think I could consider myself to be in the "normal" range; I still have a bit of a gut for christ's sake. Though I think the true intent of such a simple calculation is to get the four-foot-two person who weighs 230lbs. to admit that more than just their bones are big. #: 11:05 AM posted by Donnie (aka Shadowtwin) Thanks to dieting this year, I'm down to 22.8! And yes, the dietician I met with mentioned that, especially for men, waist-size is really the main thing. (I lost a couple of inches there.) #: 3:14 PM posted by Anonymous Post a Comment << Home Archives May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2012

Archives