Masters Fatties are significant contributors to Global Warming

[Kurgan Gringioni]

From:
http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Obesity_Contributes_To_Global_Warming_17708.html

According to a team from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical
Medicine, obesity has a significant contribution to global warming and
also to the increasingly worrying world food crisis.

The scientists reached the conclusion that obese people consume 18
percent more calories than the average. They are also causing the
consumption of large quantities of fuel, which has a direct
environmental impact.

Another observation referred to the required calories needed to
sustain normal energy, which for obese people is of 1,680 daily
calories and another 1,280 calories are needed in order to maintain
daily activities – both figures at a fifth more than normal.

A study conducted by the World Health Organization expressed a serious
concern that the obese population will cross the 700 million milestone
by the year 2015.

One of the countries struggling with the issue is the UK, where nearly
a quarter of the adult population are registered in the category. Back
in the 1980s the number was half that.

The researchers concluded that obese people are more likely to rely on
transportation and put a significant strain on that transport due to
their mass, which also leads to price rises and usage.

A rather efficient solution to the issue came in the form of the
simple idea of promoting walking and cycling.

 

[Bill C]

On May 17, 5:10 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <[email protected]> wrote:

> The researchers concluded that obese people are more likely to rely on
> transportation and put a significant strain on that transport due to
> their mass, which also leads to price rises and usage.
>
> A rather efficient solution to the issue came in the form of the
> simple idea of promoting walking and cycling.

What a shock!! Now if we could actually make the life of a cyclist,
motorcyclist, or pedestrian worth more than a couple hundred bucks,
and some probation it might be safer to walk and cycle. Seems that
unless you're dead drunk while running them down it ranks a little
above jaywalking in the crime hierarchy. Cutting all the phys-ed stuff
at the schools is really cost effective too.
Bill C

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<f6452918-bc7b-4376-8d44-ad5e93adb0cf@y22g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
Kurgan Gringioni <[email protected]> wrote:

> From:
> http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Obesity_Contributes_To_Global_Warming_17708.html
>
> According to a team from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical
> Medicine, obesity has a significant contribution to global warming and
> also to the increasingly worrying world food crisis.
>
> The scientists reached the conclusion that obese people consume 18
> percent more calories than the average. They are also causing the
> consumption of large quantities of fuel, which has a direct
> environmental impact.
>
> Another observation referred to the required calories needed to
> sustain normal energy, which for obese people is of 1,680 daily
> calories and another 1,280 calories are needed in order to maintain
> daily activities ­ both figures at a fifth more than normal.
>
> A study conducted by the World Health Organization expressed a serious
> concern that the obese population will cross the 700 million milestone
> by the year 2015.
>
> One of the countries struggling with the issue is the UK, where nearly
> a quarter of the adult population are registered in the category. Back
> in the 1980s the number was half that.
>
> The researchers concluded that obese people are more likely to rely on
> transportation and put a significant strain on that transport due to
> their mass, which also leads to price rises and usage.
>
> A rather efficient solution to the issue came in the form of the
> simple idea of promoting walking and cycling.

How much of the increase is from redefinition of `obese'?

--
Michael Press

 

[[email protected]]

On May 17, 7:19 pm, Bill C <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 17, 5:10 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > The researchers concluded that obese people are more likely to rely on
> > transportation and put a significant strain on that transport due to
> > their mass, which also leads to price rises and usage.
>
> > A rather efficient solution to the issue came in the form of the
> > simple idea of promoting walking and cycling.
>
> What a shock!! Now if we could actually make the life of a cyclist,
> motorcyclist, or pedestrian worth more than a couple hundred bucks,
> and some probation it might be safer to walk and cycle. Seems that
> unless you're dead drunk while running them down it ranks a little
> above jaywalking in the crime hierarchy. Cutting all the phys-ed stuff
> at the schools is really cost effective too.
> Bill C

Cutting phys-ed is a friggin' shame. Childhood obesity in the U.S. is
a train wreck of massive proportions. Try and imagine the state of
the health care system in 25 years when all of the obese kids come of
age. Sports and physical activity here (U.S.) seems to have become
the stuff reserved only for the elite even when it comes to kids. No
point in working your ass of unless there's a scholarship, contract,
or some other such incentive in the offering. Removing phys-ed from
the requirements only reinforces this mindset.

Same thing with cycling-- elitism and eccentricity are the rule.
Those on the outside think all cyclists are freaks while those on the
inside think those that don't pedal $5000 bikes are posers/losers/
freds.

 

[Bill C]

On May 18, 9:28 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On May 17, 7:19 pm, Bill C <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 5:10 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > The researchers concluded that obese people are more likely to rely on
> > > transportation and put a significant strain on that transport due to
> > > their mass, which also leads to price rises and usage.
>
> > > A rather efficient solution to the issue came in the form of the
> > > simple idea of promoting walking and cycling.
>
> > What a shock!! Now if we could actually make the life of a cyclist,
> > motorcyclist, or pedestrian worth more than a couple hundred bucks,
> > and some probation it might be safer to walk and cycle. Seems that
> > unless you're dead drunk while running them down it ranks a little
> > above jaywalking in the crime hierarchy. Cutting all the phys-ed stuff
> > at the schools is really cost effective too.
> >  Bill C
>
> Cutting phys-ed is a friggin' shame.  Childhood obesity in the U.S. is
> a train wreck of massive proportions.  Try and imagine the state of
> the health care system in 25 years when all of the obese kids come of
> age.  Sports and physical activity here (U.S.) seems to have become
> the stuff reserved only for the elite even when it comes to kids.  No
> point in working your ass of unless there's a scholarship, contract,
> or some other such incentive in the offering.  Removing phys-ed from
> the requirements only reinforces this mindset.
>
> Same thing with cycling-- elitism and eccentricity are the rule.
> Those on the outside think all cyclists are freaks while those on the
> inside think those that don't pedal $5000 bikes are posers/losers/
> freds.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

A bunch of us are working on changing both. Lots of people doing
races, and other things to get kids out there. I don't see cutting
phuys-ed as an elitist thing, it's just an easy cut to make while
putting the focus on "education". Not sure what effect it has on the
schools insurance premiums, but I'd guess it makes their underwriters
happier, especially with all the cuts to nurses, and medical staff a
lot of schools have made.
It's gonna take parents and communities making this a priority, and
with more and more parents living a sedentary, obese lifestyle that's
not a good thing for the kids.
Bill C