Firm Believers more likely Flabby---1998 Purdue Study Says

  • Thread starter Thread starter spiritblows
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

spiritblows

Guest
Link to article

According to this 1998 Purdue University study, religious people are more likely to be overweight. There are lots of articles out there, just google, but I stumbled across this one. I was curious about the difference bettween denominations. They say that differences in denominations is more related to socio-economic background, but that they did find that in all 50 states that religious people are heavier than non-religious people.

I wonder why this is true? Any speculation on the cause?
 
spiritblows said:
Link to article

According to this 1998 Purdue University study, religious people are more likely to be overweight. There are lots of articles out there, just google, but I stumbled across this one. I was curious about the difference bettween denominations. They say that differences in denominations is more related to socio-economic background, but that they did find that in all 50 states that religious people are heavier than non-religious people.

I wonder why this is true? Any speculation on the cause?
Click to expand...

:whacky: So religion is making them fat? Well so much for the food thing. :whistle:
 
StMarkEofE said:
:whacky: So religion is making them fat? Well so much for the food thing. :whistle:
Click to expand...

I’m not sure if they are claiming that religion makes people fat. They speculate a little in the article, but not sure if they draw any definate conclusions.

I wonder if religious people get less exersise? Or maybe, they are more likely to have larger families, so can’t exersise? Maybe churches have too many food centered social activities? Or maybe, the time spent on Bible studies, and church activities are time spent away from more active pursuits?
 
40.png
spiritblows:
I’m not sure if they are claiming that religion makes people fat. They speculate a little in the article, but not sure if they draw any definate conclusions.

I wonder if religious people get less exersise? Or maybe, they are more likely to have larger families, so can’t exersise? Maybe churches have too many food centered social activities? Or maybe, the time spent on Bible studies, and church activities are time spent away from more active pursuits?
Click to expand...
Well I guess it the age thing but I was thinner as a Roman Catholic but since I have become Orthodox Ive gained 20 pounds. Well Im sure my inactivity and age do play a part in this. Or, heres a brain storm::bigyikes:

Most younger people are more active and are less likely to be affiliated with an established religion or have fallen away from their parents churches, and therefore getting older one has to prepare for the inevitable and starts going to church instead of the gymnasium. 😉
 
I don’t know about any hard evidence, but I can tell you what my Pentecostal friend tells me (only partially facetiously) about her church. She says they are all fat because everything enjoyable except food is forbidden as sinful. Dancing, drinking, smoking, going to movies, even going to the beauty parlor (all the older women have long hair, usually worn wrapped up in a bun). They are allowed to eat, and so they do. Abundantly.

As for me, personally, I am overweight and it has nothing whatsoever to do with my religion. I became overweight as a teen when my faith was non-existant. Now that I am back home in the Church, I am more mindful of the excesses I have committed against my body, and I struggle to lose what I have put on over so many years.
 
My unscientific guess would be that religious people have different priorities than non-religious. Many non-religious types instead worship success and in my opinion would be the type to spend time and money on looking the part. As such, they would be more likely to spend several hours each day working out, etc.

Also, the clientele of health food stores tend to be liberals and non-religious. (Not all; I recognize that it is a sweeping generalization. But then again, I’m responding to one as well.)

So in my opinion, those people who are more concerned about the self are more likely to place more emphasis on the maintenance and appearance of the self. Whereas those who are religious are more likely to balance their personal needs with their other priorities such as family time and budget, community needs, etc.

Plus, I saw another recent study that said being slightly overweight seems to be beneficial. Ha! Just goes to show that if we set our priorities in order, then our lives will follow suit.
 
Dear ForestPine,
I think glossing over the dangers of extra weight and saying that thinner people, who try and stay fit and healthy, are merely self-absorbed narcissists, is really merely an excersise in deflecting blame for our own personal failings.

First of all, gluttony is mentioned as a sin in the Bible. Overeating is not a ‘sign of having one’s priorities in the right place’. Eating too much food is bad for your health, and obesity is causing the life expectancy in America to start to decrease. The problem is not with people being ‘slightly overweight’, this is a serious national health concern that is affecting our quality of life, driving up the cost of healthcare, and making people die sooner.
 
I wonder if there’s any overlap with the fact that people who are poorer tend to be overweight because they eat cheaper which tends to be starchier food? Not that all people of faith are poor but I think the poor tend to be more likely to be religious.

I wouldn’t think it would be family size. Wouldn’t more children == more exercise for moms and dads alike? To say nothing of less sleep! I think keeping up with two ambulatory toddlers would beat the gym as a workout anyday. Plus, it has the added benefit that you can’t just stop dealing with the children like you can quit going to the gym.

Amy
 
Wow! That’s a whole lot of stereotypes wrapped up into one little post!
I think glossing over the dangers of extra weight and saying that thinner people, who try and stay fit and healthy, are merely self-absorbed narcissists, is really merely an exercise in deflecting blame for our own personal failings.
Click to expand...
First, you have no clue what size I am. Second, a little extra weight does not put oneself in excess danger. As a matter of fact, other countries (such as Greece and Italy) seem to have much larger average body types and much healthier hearts. Third, this is not a black and white–you are thin or you are gluttonous–issue. This is a continuum of excessively focused on oneself being on one end and no concern for oneself on the other, and most people fall somewhere in the middle. Fourth, being overweight does not equal gluttonous. There are numerous other issues. Fifth, at what weight a person becomes “overweight” is highly debated and the US is currently moving the ideal weights up, recognizing that they were far too low. Sixth, you seem to be taking the study far further than its scientific conclusions ever could in proclaiming all religious to be far more likely to be “self-absorbed narcissists.”
First of all, gluttony is mentioned as a sin in the Bible. Overeating is not a ‘sign of having one’s priorities in the right place’. Eating too much food is bad for your health, and obesity is causing the life expectancy in America to start to decrease. The problem is not with people being ‘slightly overweight’, this is a serious national health concern that is affecting our quality of life, driving up the cost of healthcare, and making people die sooner.
Click to expand...
While Americans are very unhealthy on average, I don’t think it is because we are all gluttonous pigs. Did you watch Supersize Me? McDonalds will kill you–even in small amounts. The problem is the standard food industry is using chemicals and ingredients that are known to be unhealthy and even banned in other countries. The problem is that there is no incentive for the industry to make its foods healthier. The problem is the inflated costs of healthier foods which prohibit the vast amount of Americans from purchasing them on a regular basis. The problem is the food industry willfully tricking the public into paying more for supposedly healthier foods while not disclosing their slick marketing ploys. (Check that Dole Organic salad bag and see that it is full of preservatives. It is in court right now that the overwhelming amount of foods labeled “organic” really aren’t. The industry’s argument is simply that they will “lose” money by saying “Made with organic ingredients” --which is the proper title for such foods-- because people won’t pay as much for that.) The problem is the demands on Americans’ time and the expectation of being connected to work 24/7. (When computers became popular, France reduced the work week to 35 hours as people were now more efficient. America instead expected workers to continue working from home after their 40 hour work weeks.) The problem is the lack of industry standards to promote healthful living such as paid vacation time, which is a huge luxury for the elite in our country, but expected in other countries. The problem is our extreme focus promulgated in the media of anorexia being the status quo, which leads Americans to go to the other extreme in mentality in retaliation instead and say that extreme obesity is perfectly OK. The problem is our relativistic culture which says we cannot be concerned for the well-being of others.

The problem, in a nutshell, is a lack of balance. It seems to be perpetuated in your post.
 
Dear Forest,
I really don’t want to get into it with you, your posts don’t have paragraphs and are hard to read. I wasn’t accusing you personally of being overweight, but I think the reasoning in your first post is entirely absurd. From what I read in your second post, you are responding emotionally and without even considering the data offered in the Purdue study, but just making excuses for people, meanwhile accusing thin people of being vain and self-absorbed. I’m not going to respond to anymore of your posts on this particular thread.

To all others:
What do you think contribute to religious people being more prone to be overweight? How can churches help people be healthier?
 
40.png
a_cermak:
I wonder if there’s any overlap with the fact that people who are poorer tend to be overweight because they eat cheaper which tends to be starchier food? Not that all people of faith are poor but I think the poor tend to be more likely to be religious.

I wouldn’t think it would be family size. Wouldn’t more children == more exercise for moms and dads alike? To say nothing of less sleep! I think keeping up with two ambulatory toddlers would beat the gym as a workout anyday. Plus, it has the added benefit that you can’t just stop dealing with the children like you can quit going to the gym.

Amy
Click to expand...
From the study, it sounds like they factored in socio-economic status, which more explained the differences in denominations, because some of them tended to be heavier, but also had poorer people, such as the Baptists, which were the heaviest group.
 
I am too skinny, and Catholic. We should conduct our own poll on here. Does anyone know how?
 
40.png
TheRaiders:
I am too skinny, and Catholic. We should conduct our own poll on here. Does anyone know how?
Click to expand...
LOL, I don’t think the polls here are very scientific…😉

The reason I even looked into this matter and stumbled across the article is that I have a vague, anecdotal impression, from my totally casual observations, that Evangelical Christians tend to carry more weight than Catholics. Now, according to this study, differences in denominations results from socio-economic factors. I was hypothisizing that maybe it resulting in Evangelicals having more food-centered church socials and better coffee hours after church.
 
40.png
spiritblows:
I was curious about the difference bettween denominations. They say that differences in denominations is more related to socio-economic background. . . .
Click to expand...
That’s something I have pondered too. Certainly, in the south anyway, your average joe anti-Catholic seems to come from a certain socio-economic condition and attends church with similar joes where anti-Catholicism is preached.
 
mark a:
That’s something I have pondered too. Certainly, in the south anyway, your average joe anti-Catholic seems to come from a certain socio-economic condition and attends church with similar joes where anti-Catholicism is preached.
Click to expand...
Right, and I really have a strong impression that anti-Catholic churches tend to have less educated people in them. I would sumise that the Catholic Church probably has the best cross-section of socio-economic groups. The different Protestant denominations are definately more stratified, with Episcopalians on the high-end, next Presbytarians, Lutherens, etc. I think the Holy-roller churches, 4-square, Southern Baptist etc, tend to be more economically challanged, and probably less educated…
 
The above is quite true.
As to the weight statistics, surely fat Southern fundamentalists have skewed the results.
Southerners tend to be more obese anyway, and when you consider that Southern Baptists are the largest protestant sect in the US…
 
40.png
spiritblows:
Dear ForestPine,
I think glossing over the dangers of extra weight and saying that thinner people, who try and stay fit and healthy, are merely self-absorbed narcissists, is really merely an excersise in deflecting blame for our own personal failings.

First of all, gluttony is mentioned as a sin in the Bible. Overeating is not a ‘sign of having one’s priorities in the right place’. Eating too much food is bad for your health, and obesity is causing the life expectancy in America to start to decrease. The problem is not with people being ‘slightly overweight’, this is a serious national health concern that is affecting our quality of life, driving up the cost of healthcare, and making people die sooner.
Click to expand...
Well said. You dont have to look like a model, especially if you’re a busy mom, but being more than “slightly overweight” is a serious problem. Being very overweight is extremely unhealthy and causing serious problems, especially for young children. These posts make it sound like going to the gym is a bad thing! I don’t know why religious people tend to be heavier though. Like the article said, it could have something to do with economic status. and I repeat, I’m not talking about a few extra pounds! You dont have to be superskinny - thats not healthy either (although being skinny and muscular by doing the right things is)…I’m talking about someone who is legitimatly overweight - and for those who said there’s a question as to what overweight is, I dont think it’s that hard to figure out . I’m 5 feet and small boned so my normal isnt necessarily what’s defined in medical journals, but I would still recognize if I was overweight.
 
Hi

It looks like the ‘study’ was not a study at all. A study is where you form a hypothisis (christrians are fat) and go gather data to test the hypothosis.

This is an ‘analysis’. The data was there and they ran correlations with everything they could find. Bingo…the christians are fat.

This is called a shotgun approach to thinking. It has been used before and greatly condemned because it produces ‘information’ that on later testing is sometimes wrong.

We need to establish a hypothesis, at test it by gathering data OUTSIDE THE DATASET that generated the hypothesis.

For all we know, if the correlation is correct, is that Heavier people are attracted to religion…ie. Weight causes Christians! The title of the article should be Flabby people love God, bless their soul.

We should be talking about all christians, not just those in the study, maybe they should use another country?!! Is it also true in Mexico or Canada or Europe or Africa.
 
Were they overweight before they became religious, or relgiious before they became overweight?

I have a theory, yet it may be a controversial one. Jesus said something like, “it is easier for a camel to fit through the head of a needle then a rich man to enterthe kingdom”.

I’ve always found my own form of interpretation of this passage. I don’t necassarily think Jesus meant solely monetary weath. I believe he meant “rich” with wordly treasures. In this country we have people who are famous for no other reason then thier beauty and social status. Almost without exception these people do not appear to lead a life following Jesus (even though many profess they do). They wear reavelaing tantilizing clothes and swap spouses more often then I swap cars among many other things. Beauty, to many, is a deterant to following Jesus. In some ways those of us who are not in the likeness of a Hollywood movie star, find it easier to follow Christ.

Just a theory. And of course this is a generalization. Mel Gibson who was once (I believe I really don’t follow these things) voted Americas most sexy (or something ) man chose to put aside his attributes and follow Christ. And there are many many other attractive people who follow Christ.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top