Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Explanation: the fat ones can't climb out of their stateholes   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Awkward, shot  
•       •       •

1811 clicks; posted to STEM » on 01 Jul 2022 at 9:05 AM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



48 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-07-01 8:08:19 AM  
Original Tweet:

 
2022-07-01 8:55:30 AM  
Well duh.  Everyone knows the closer to the center of the earth you are, the stronger gravity is.
 
2022-07-01 9:00:15 AM  

OdradekRex: Well duh.  Everyone knows the closer to the center of the earth you are, the stronger gravity is.


Fixed that for you.

Also... we'll need the data on butter, and crisco consumption. The deepest red of those places love them some fatty ass foods.
 
2022-07-01 9:11:38 AM  
Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?
 
2022-07-01 9:19:43 AM  

mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?


To follow the point the poster was attempting, even southwest costal dwellers spend time in the mountains - recreationally or during other forms of travel.  They have access to high altitude areas on a nearly daily basis, and take advantage of it regularly.  Regardless of where their house is.  Someone in Georgia or Mississippi, not so much.
 
2022-07-01 9:34:44 AM  
Correlation is not causation.
 
2022-07-01 9:35:05 AM  
Fat people have a hard time breathing at altitude, die earlier.
 
2022-07-01 9:41:33 AM  
The reason there aren't as many fat people in those areas is because the bears have an easier time catching them.
 
2022-07-01 9:50:42 AM  

Nimbull: The reason there aren't as many fat people in those areas is because the bears have an easier time catching them.


We skinny people call that the Buddy System.
 
2022-07-01 9:51:32 AM  
Interesting thing to look at, but how about we use fresher data than 2009?
 
2022-07-01 10:09:35 AM  
Or it means high altitude areas are more affluent, and with the exception of Denver, cities aren't in such areas.
 
2022-07-01 10:13:22 AM  

Nimbull: The reason there aren't as many fat people in those areas is because the bears have an easier time catching them.


HugeMistake: Nimbull: The reason there aren't as many fat people in those areas is because the bears have an easier time catching them.

We skinny people call that the Buddy System.


Damn you both!
 
2022-07-01 10:16:33 AM  

thornhill: Or it means high altitude areas are more affluent, and with the exception of Denver, cities aren't in such areas.


Cities don't seem particularly susceptible to obesity. The Northeast Corridor seems to be all pretty light colored on that chart, as are Chicago, the Florida coast, and the major cities of Texas.
 
2022-07-01 10:17:26 AM  
It's almost like altitude is strongly correlated to average annual temperature. Hmmmmm.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-07-01 10:23:03 AM  

olrasputin: It's almost like altitude is strongly correlated to average annual temperature. Hmmmmm.

[Fark user image 850x620]


also lines up to political parties
brilliantmaps.comView Full Size
 
2022-07-01 10:23:47 AM  

mcmnky: Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?


No, it's per capita
 
2022-07-01 10:27:19 AM  

brainlordmesomorph: olrasputin: It's almost like altitude is strongly correlated to average annual temperature. Hmmmmm.

[Fark user image 850x620]

also lines up to political parties
[brilliantmaps.com image 850x538]


No... no, it doesn't. That looks nothing like an altitude map of the United States.
 
2022-07-01 10:32:01 AM  

mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?


It does probably correlate to population buoyancy.
 
2022-07-01 10:40:14 AM  

Eddie Hazel's E string: Interesting thing to look at, but how about we use fresher data than 2009?


Why? Do you think those fat asses have been dieting?
 
2022-07-01 10:45:19 AM  

mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?


Yes. The highest point in the entire state of Florida is 345 feet.  Downtown Los Angeles is 305 feet.
 
2022-07-01 10:47:36 AM  

12349876: mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?

Yes. The highest point in the entire state of Florida is 345 feet.  Downtown Los Angeles is 305 feet.


Maybe the better way of explaining is that Orlando is only 82 feet compared to LA 305.
 
2022-07-01 10:49:46 AM  

12349876: 12349876: mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?

Yes. The highest point in the entire state of Florida is 345 feet.  Downtown Los Angeles is 305 feet.

Maybe the better way of explaining is that Orlando is only 82 feet compared to LA 305.


One more and I'll stop. Two other cities much farther inland than Los Angeles that are under 300 feet are Columbia SC and Shreveport.
 
2022-07-01 10:56:00 AM  
It's because of all the oil in top of the Gulf. Obesity is the maillard effect of the confit. Or whatever it is that makes fries so tasty.
 
2022-07-01 10:58:49 AM  
But the important thing is that it has nothing to do with any fat hogs living anywhere, it's the altitude making things all complicated.
 
2022-07-01 11:01:08 AM  

12349876: 12349876: 12349876: mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?

Yes. The highest point in the entire state of Florida is 345 feet.  Downtown Los Angeles is 305 feet.

Maybe the better way of explaining is that Orlando is only 82 feet compared to LA 305.

One more and I'll stop. Two other cities much farther inland than Los Angeles that are under 300 feet are Columbia SC and Shreveport.


I'm not sure if you're arguing against my point or agreeing.

In the picture, Southern California is in the same category as much of the Sierra Nevada and Rocky mountains. Altitude differences of thousands of feet. Compare that to Louisiana, South Carolina, North Carolina.

40 feet is not a significant difference in altitude.
 
2022-07-01 11:02:38 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Eddie Hazel's E string: Interesting thing to look at, but how about we use fresher data than 2009?

Why? Do you think those fat asses have been dieting?


Lotta population redistribution since then.
 
2022-07-01 11:21:05 AM  

mcmnky: 12349876: 12349876: 12349876: mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?

Yes. The highest point in the entire state of Florida is 345 feet.  Downtown Los Angeles is 305 feet.

Maybe the better way of explaining is that Orlando is only 82 feet compared to LA 305.

One more and I'll stop. Two other cities much farther inland than Los Angeles that are under 300 feet are Columbia SC and Shreveport.

I'm not sure if you're arguing against my point or agreeing.

In the picture, Southern California is in the same category as much of the Sierra Nevada and Rocky mountains. Altitude differences of thousands of feet. Compare that to Louisiana, South Carolina, North Carolina.

40 feet is not a significant difference in altitude.


My point was the west coast goes very quickly from beach to mountains and other significant elevation whereas the southeast goes hundreds of miles before you find significant elevation.

So the people living 5, 20, 50, 100 miles inland in the southeast are at a much lower altitude than those on the west coast.
 
2022-07-01 11:24:35 AM  
I haven't poked into the methodology, but this paper claims there really is a statistically significant association between obesity and altitude in the U.S., even after controlling for a bunch of demographic, climatological, and factors.  It ended up being the third most influential factor, after physical inactivity and smoking (collectively explaining about 40% of the variation in obesity).
 
2022-07-01 11:37:38 AM  

Ambitwistor: I haven't poked into the methodology, but this paper claims there really is a statistically significant association between obesity and altitude in the U.S., even after controlling for a bunch of demographic, climatological, and factors.  It ended up being the third most influential factor, after physical inactivity and smoking (collectively explaining about 40% of the variation in obesity).


Alright...but...

...physical inactivity?

That's almost (but not quite-I know) like including shootings as one of the factors that correlates to violent crime rate.

My whole point with temperature was trying to get at a proximate cause for the physical inactivity itself.

E.g. places that're hot, not next to water, and don't have the population to support cool exercise facilities, shaded park trails, and so forth.
 
2022-07-01 11:49:18 AM  

olrasputin: Ambitwistor: I haven't poked into the methodology, but this paper claims there really is a statistically significant association between obesity and altitude in the U.S., even after controlling for a bunch of demographic, climatological, and factors.  It ended up being the third most influential factor, after physical inactivity and smoking (collectively explaining about 40% of the variation in obesity).

Alright...but...

...physical inactivity?

That's almost (but not quite-I know) like including shootings as one of the factors that correlates to violent crime rate.


Sort of, usually calorie intake is way more important to obesity than calorie burning, so I think it's fair to treat it as a separate predictor.

My whole point with temperature was trying to get at a proximate cause for the physical inactivity itself.

The study did control for temperature separately, but as you say, physical inactivity might be dependent on temperature.  It's hard to draw causal conclusions when your covariates are correlated.
 
2022-07-01 12:00:35 PM  
Ambitwistor:
The study did control for temperature separately, but as you say, physical inactivity might be dependent on temperature.  It's hard to draw causal conclusions when your covariates are correlated.

Still been too lazy to look at the actual paper. I don't suppose they included their correlation matrix?

Sort of, usually calorie intake is way more important to obesity than calorie burning, so I think it's fair to treat it as a separate predictor.

I agree with you, but there are a lot of folks in the south who squeak by on basically zero extra calorie burning. Like, 5 or 6 days per week they get up, get ready, go to home office or car, work all day, walk or drive back to couch, remain there until bed, excepting trips to kitchen and bathroom. Literally maybe 200 steps for the day for exercise, total.

Sure, that's a farked up lifestyle that's very much on the individual, but both the hellish heat and typical city layouts (which sprawl a LOT, because land was cheap) are big contributors there. And while calorie intake is definitely still primary, not burning an extra couple hundred calories a day from walking around or going outside and doing normal human stuff can add up over the years.
 
2022-07-01 12:16:35 PM  

Dasher McHappenstance: Correlation is not causation.


But in this case, it maybe.
There are suspected benefits to high altitude living.

Theory is, your body has two gas pedals: oxygen and protein. We know that the harder the body hits that protien pedal, the shorter a lifespan might be, likely due to an overcharged synthesis.

Now, does this also correlate to o2? Not a lot of scientific evidence! But it's entirely possible that training your body to be more efficient with o2 has benefits at the cellular (mitochondria) level.

I've struggled with my weight most my life. My feet are shot so cardio is hard to do.

Since I came to Denver, I've lost more weight than I ever thought possible. I'm at my lowest in 10 years at the moment.
 
2022-07-01 12:44:09 PM  

Eddie Hazel's E string: Interesting thing to look at, but how about we use fresher data than 2009?


I think their leaning heavily on the fact that topography isn't likely to have changed much in 13 years
 
2022-07-01 12:44:37 PM  

Eddie Hazel's E string: brainlordmesomorph: olrasputin: It's almost like altitude is strongly correlated to average annual temperature. Hmmmmm.

[Fark user image 850x620]

also lines up to political parties
[brilliantmaps.com image 850x538]

No... no, it doesn't. That looks nothing like an altitude map of the United States.



no it matches to the map of fat people better than elevation does.

Look at Florida (all 1 elevation, but the blue counties are thinner)  and the red parts of OR, WA and CA
 
2022-07-01 12:51:36 PM  
Altitude?  Looks like education to me.
 
2022-07-01 12:51:52 PM  

MurphyMurphy: Dasher McHappenstance: Correlation is not causation.

But in this case, it maybe.
There are suspected benefits to high altitude living.

Theory is, your body has two gas pedals: oxygen and protein. We know that the harder the body hits that protien pedal, the shorter a lifespan might be, likely due to an overcharged synthesis.

Now, does this also correlate to o2? Not a lot of scientific evidence! But it's entirely possible that training your body to be more efficient with o2 has benefits at the cellular (mitochondria) level.

I've struggled with my weight most my life. My feet are shot so cardio is hard to do.

Since I came to Denver, I've lost more weight than I ever thought possible. I'm at my lowest in 10 years at the moment.


Gravity wells slow time. You are just speeding toward wirey old person physique
 
2022-07-01 12:54:52 PM  

BlazeTrailer: Eddie Hazel's E string: Interesting thing to look at, but how about we use fresher data than 2009?

I think their leaning heavily on the fact that topography isn't likely to have changed much in 13 years


Well yes, but you don't think there's any possibility of change at county-level obesity numbers since then? Populations redistributing, changes to birth rates, public health initiatives, immigration, deaths from Covid?
 
2022-07-01 1:05:02 PM  

Arkanaut: thornhill: Or it means high altitude areas are more affluent, and with the exception of Denver, cities aren't in such areas.

Cities don't seem particularly susceptible to obesity. The Northeast Corridor seems to be all pretty light colored on that chart, as are Chicago, the Florida coast, and the major cities of Texas.


People in cities walk more.
 
2022-07-01 1:10:17 PM  

Mail Order American Husband: Arkanaut: thornhill: Or it means high altitude areas are more affluent, and with the exception of Denver, cities aren't in such areas.

Cities don't seem particularly susceptible to obesity. The Northeast Corridor seems to be all pretty light colored on that chart, as are Chicago, the Florida coast, and the major cities of Texas.

People in cities walk more.


Population density = education level = better medical care = healthier diets
 
2022-07-01 2:01:05 PM  

MurphyMurphy: Dasher McHappenstance: Correlation is not causation.

But in this case, it maybe.
There are suspected benefits to high altitude living.

Theory is, your body has two gas pedals: oxygen and protein. We know that the harder the body hits that protien pedal, the shorter a lifespan might be, likely due to an overcharged synthesis.

Now, does this also correlate to o2? Not a lot of scientific evidence! But it's entirely possible that training your body to be more efficient with o2 has benefits at the cellular (mitochondria) level.

I've struggled with my weight most my life. My feet are shot so cardio is hard to do.

Since I came to Denver, I've lost more weight than I ever thought possible. I'm at my lowest in 10 years at the moment.


Heading to my parents at 2000 feet.  Expect to be well fed (and wined) so will likely gain weight.  Also gained 200 feet of altitude and moved to a seriously colder place (Fredneck, MD to Rochester, NY) and really put on the weight (drank like a farker, cut back a bit but haven't lost the weight).
 
2022-07-01 2:12:47 PM  

OdradekRex: Well duh.  Everyone knows the closer to the center of the earth you are, the stronger gravity is.


Or maybe the reason this correlation appears is because high population + lots of fatties pushes in and compacts the ground, causing low elevation.

Low elevation = higher temperature. Specifically 3.5 degrees every 1,000 ft. So obviously Denver at 5200 ft would be 18 degrees cooler than Florida at 0 ft.

So the fatties cause elevation to crash and therefore raise the temperature, thus are the leading cause of global warming.

QED
 
2022-07-01 4:15:48 PM  

mcmnky: Huh? So the southeast coastal area has a significant altitude difference from the southwest coastal area?

Or is this another xkcd your map is just population density?


Yeah, I don't recall hearing anything about Sherpa being needed to traverse Miami.
 
2022-07-01 5:48:46 PM  

olrasputin: It's almost like altitude is strongly correlated to average annual temperature. Hmmmmm.

[Fark user image image 850x620]


You would have to account for latitude in that map.

I'm sure there are coastal cities in Europe on the same latitude as Alpine cities/towns. Compare those cities.
 
2022-07-01 7:25:40 PM  

lilbjorn: Altitude?  Looks like education to me.


That's probably the main driver, but look at the difference in Appalachia. Them ain't book readin' folk.
 
2022-07-01 10:20:59 PM  
brainlordmesomorph:also lines up to political parties
[brilliantmaps.com image 850x538]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-07-01 10:31:27 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Also... we'll need the data on butter, and crisco consumption.


I lost a ton of weight and I literally drink butter...in my coffee. If you want to run a 10k in the morning, let's go.

If you want to lose weight, watch what a fat person eats and don't eat that.

/It's carbs and sugar.
 
2022-07-01 10:47:38 PM  
we really don't know all that much about the cause of obesity!!!

i.imgflip.comView Full Size
 
2022-07-02 2:16:23 PM  

Dasher McHappenstance: Correlation is not causation.


Is not necessarily causation. But sometimes, it absolutely farking is.

It's like people learned this phrase in their one quarter of college level statistics courses and throw it up there to mean "I can ignore all correlation because it can't be the cause." That's not what the phrase means.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.