What is that link supposed to be a good explanation of, or did you post the wrong one?
Concur. I must say that practically everyone I know here in Okie consider themselves in the ‘South’. And that I see far, far more obese persons (up to and including ‘morbidly’) here than in TX and ID, by far (maybe even combined?). Not the best cross-section, obviously, but can give a general feel. In my neighborhood’s block, I can say that of the 6 homes I can see from my driveway, 4 of them have folks that are definitely over ~250-300# with a few barely able to walk easily. Really sad, actually, but that’s just me.
Working in hospitals, first in Central Tx, then up in Central/Southern Idaho, for a decade or so, I got accustomed to ‘average’ size patients with the occasional ‘BiGBoy’. Moving to OK ~2000 and then working the hospitals here shocked me as the many persons often weighed too much to use a typical X-ray table. Usually, at least once per shift but often repeatedly, a nurse would call and ask about weight-limits, etc, and where they could schedule a patient that exceeded limits (usually around 350-400 lbs for an average X-Ray/CT table, and that was risky for parts busting off anyways). One 8hr shift had every single patient outweighing the machine’s limits, so made that day easy, but not surprising. Just sayin’…
So the relative ease of viewing masturbation porn has contributed to obesity? “Back in *my *day, we had to climb trees to get a view like that.” 
OK, I’ll bite. This may just be a colossal brain fart, but how does it work that 34% of the US population is obese, but the highest state obesity rate is 33.8%? I can’t figure out any way to make that math work. Or am I misreading the numbers?
Actually, I think it was a brain fart on my part. I read Electric Warrior’s post differently than you did. Your restatement here makes a lot more sense. And off the top of my head, I don’t actually have an answer.
It could be that nationally 34 percent of people are OVERWEIGHT or OBESE.
In the heftyiest state, 34 percent of the people in that state are actually OBESE.
Could be. But this is what the link says:
Now, those are 2008 numbers, and this is seemingly a 2010 report they’re referencing for the individual states, so it looks like these two numbers have different sources.
Or something.
What do you expect so many people down there make grease into gravy?
That’s nothing compared to the way people in Winnipeg turn one question and one statement into a mass of gibberish.
I agree. Maybe people in the southern peninsula swim laps or something.
I really did, too.
We are in northern Florida, twenty minutes from the Georgia state line, and there are many chubby people around here (from both states.)
Lots of sweet tea and fried foods ingested around here. When I go to the grocery store, I am surrounded by squadrons of shoppers on electric scooters.
I think you’re forgetting that the vast majority of Georgia’s population is comprised of people in the metro Atlanta area. Those people you saw in Valdosta aren’t particularly representative of the average Georgian. That ranking looks about right to me.
That’s correct, the nationwide rate and the individual state rates come from different sources.
That’s a significant difference, and it annoys me when news sources present numbers that are not directly comparable in this way. Just at a glance, taking into account the most populous states, it looks like given those state numbers, the national obesity rate should be around 28%-29%. So, given those numbers, I might reasonably conclude that obesity is actually on a downswing, if you compare the 2008 national number with what presumably the 2010 national number is (and which can be figured out, if the news source had the time to get out a calculator.)
That may be true. But in order to compare the states they use three years data, so for the 2010 report they used 2007-2009 data. Because of that methodology, they can’t just add up the percentages and divide by 51. The latest nationwide data they have is from 2008. The write up is certainly confusing…
Woot! #3! Suck it, West Virginia!
It were supposed to! 
Jesus Christ, I don’t know that happened. I posted from the computer at my job, too. Guess someone was having some fun last night…
Intended link: http://www.halls.md/bmi/nhanes3.htm
Not to mention the fact you need to weigh (heh) the percentage values for each state by the states population as well.
It was not supposed to be porno! Surprised me almost as much as it surprised you (I saw that it has been spoilerized). My apologies, should have double-checked my post.
I don’t think you’re correct about your cite. In the text above the maps it defines obesity as a BMI above 30. In the maps, it simply shows the prevalence of “obesity” by decade. “Obesity” as a concept has varied a lot over the last few decades years, and the data has not been adjusted to reflect this.
I don’t doubt we’re getting fatter as a population, I just don’t think it’s quite as extreme as we’re led to believe. Adults have put on around 20lbs on average across the population since the 60s - a noticeable change, but nothing crazy IMO. Average heights have also increased by an inch since then.
No worries, I’ve done it before myself. :o
I think you’re focusing on the wrong word. The trend map isn’t showing the percentage of people who were considered obese in 1985, those who were obese in 1986, then in 1987, etc., according to the definition of the word at the time. It’s showing the percentage of people who were over 30 BMI in 1985, people who were over 30 BMI in 1986, over 30 in 1987, etc. The cutoff line is static and the percentage of people over it is unmistakably climbing.