On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:54:42 GMT, "Jack Schidt®"
> wrote:

>Your driver's license has your height and weight on it. It's pretty much
>public knowledge what your 'stats' are. Eye color too. Your insurance
>company knows too. It's not like they're medical records or anything.

I've never given height/weight information to my insurance company.
And every time I get a new driver's license they just copy the
information from my old one. My current driver's license lists a
weight that's 25 pounds less than what I currently weigh. Granted, the
current plan involves getting rid of those 25 pounds, but the license
is still inaccurate...

-Sapphire.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:24:09 GMT, Cindy Fuller
> wrote:


>You didn't read Jane Brody's column a week or two ago. The trend is
>actually the opposite of what you describe. A women's size 8 today is
>what used to be a size 12 20 years ago. The higher end clothing
>manufacturers have initiated "vanity sizing", to satisfy women who want
>to claim they're still a size 8 despite the middle aged spread.

Amazing. Perhaps it is regional. Out on the left coast I have found
the opposite. When I wear exact measure clothing (16-1/2 x 34 shirts
for example), or the M shirts I purchased 25-30 years ago (yes, I still
have some that were packed away and brought back out recently) the
clothes fit. Yet, went I try on new relatively sized shirts the M tends
to be tight and I need to but L.

Nancy -- check out today's (1/30) 'Luann' comic at

http://comics.com/comics/luann/index.html

Couldn't be a better illustration of this thread. :-)

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:54:42 GMT, "Jack Schidt®"
> wrote:


>Fast Food, from M-W:
>
>1 : of, relating to, or specializing in food that can be prepared and served
>quickly <a fast-food restaurant>
>2 : designed for ready availability, use, or consumption and with little
>consideration given to quality or significance <fast-food TV programming>
>
>'Fast food' is a newer name for old ideas. A hot dog from a cart is fast
>food. Pizza is fast food and so is Chinese takeout. We didn't have a fancy
>monicker for them then.

To me, fast food means a regional, national, or world-wide chain with
a limited menu of standardized offerings geared to mass tastes and
usually high-fat, high-calorie.

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:12:53 GMT, Frogleg > wrote:

>On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:18:38 -0500, Nancy Young
> wrote:
>
>>... you know the rest.
>
>The usual quote is "There are lies, damn[ed] lies, and statistics,"
>variously attributed to Mark Twain who attributed it to Disraeli, and
>Churchill, who may have also used the phrase.
>>
>>I keep seeing all of these quotes, mostly here, about how many times
>>people eat fast food, how many Americans are obese, etc.
>
>Looking up the quote, I came across reference to a book titled "Damned
>Lies and Statistics" by Joel Best which looks pretty interesting.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/3cyjy
>
>The questions you ask are worth asking. Where *do* these numbers come
>from? How are they meaningful? Obviously the 'researchers' don't ask
>every single person (American?) how many times he/she ate in a fast
>food joint. What was their sample population? Urban? Rural? Age?
>Avaliability of alternatives? Many statistics are just re-pubished
>from dubious source. A lot of footnotes and references does not a
>truth make.

you might look at 'how to lie with statistics' as well.

your pal,
blake

"Robert Klute" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:24:09 GMT, Cindy Fuller
> > wrote:
>
>
> >You didn't read Jane Brody's column a week or two ago. The trend is
> >actually the opposite of what you describe. A women's size 8 today is
> >what used to be a size 12 20 years ago. The higher end clothing
> >manufacturers have initiated "vanity sizing", to satisfy women who want
> >to claim they're still a size 8 despite the middle aged spread.
>
> Amazing. Perhaps it is regional. Out on the left coast I have found
> the opposite. When I wear exact measure clothing (16-1/2 x 34 shirts
> for example), or the M shirts I purchased 25-30 years ago (yes, I still
> have some that were packed away and brought back out recently) the
> clothes fit. Yet, went I try on new relatively sized shirts the M tends
> to be tight and I need to but L.
>

I agree! I used to be a weightlifter and because of that my shoulders have
always been larger than the average woman's. I could still always fit into
either a L or XL woman's shirt. Because of finance issues and my last
profession, I didn't go to a clothing store to shop in close to 10 years (I
know it's hard to believe, but it's true). Last spring, I got a new job and
needed some *nice* clothes for work. Wow! NOTHING fit me! For my
shoulders and breasts, I needed a woman's plus sized shirt but then it
completely bagged and flowed around my waist. The only way I solved that
problem was to go in the men's department and purchase men's large or
X-large button down shirts. These fit me so that's what I wear now. I
would love to be able to fit into flowery, sleeveless dresses, but until I
learn how to make my own, it's pants, shorts, and polo-type shirts for me.

kilikini

In article >,
Robert Klute > wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:24:09 GMT, Cindy Fuller
> > wrote:
>
>
> >You didn't read Jane Brody's column a week or two ago. The trend is
> >actually the opposite of what you describe. A women's size 8 today is
> >what used to be a size 12 20 years ago. The higher end clothing
> >manufacturers have initiated "vanity sizing", to satisfy women who want
> >to claim they're still a size 8 despite the middle aged spread.
>
> Amazing. Perhaps it is regional. Out on the left coast I have found
> the opposite. When I wear exact measure clothing (16-1/2 x 34 shirts
> for example), or the M shirts I purchased 25-30 years ago (yes, I still
> have some that were packed away and brought back out recently) the
> clothes fit. Yet, went I try on new relatively sized shirts the M tends
> to be tight and I need to but L.
>

Mens' and womens' sizes are entirely different animals. The SO had a
hard time finding mens' small shirts when we lived in North Carolina,
Dallas, and NY. Because of the large Asian population here in Seattle,
we've had a much easier time finding shirts that fit him.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me

On 28 Jan 2004 20:52:27 -0800, (JulieB)
wrote:

>BMI = your weight in kg/(your height in cm)squared

I don't even get a whole number using that formula.

-sw

I wouldn't expect to. My scale showes decimal point.

--
Helen

Thanks be unto God for His wonderful gift:
Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God
is the object of our faith; the only faith that
saves is faith in Him

<>< ><>
www.peagramfamily.com
http://www.mompeagram.homestead.com/

http://www.mompeagram.homestead.com/..._WATCHERS.html

http://www.mompeagram.homestead.com/RECIPES.html


225/187.4/145





"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
> On 28 Jan 2004 20:52:27 -0800, (JulieB)
> wrote:
>
> >BMI = your weight in kg/(your height in cm)squared
>
> I don't even get a whole number using that formula.
>
> -sw

JulieB wrote:
> BMI = your weight in kg/(your height in cm)squared

BMI is a terrible indication of relative weight. It does not take body
fat into account, although you can usually tell if a high BMI is healthy
or not just by looking at the person.

My other issue is that weight goes up as you grow in three dimensions,
yet the formula uses height squared. Weight goes up faster than height,
so tall people tend to have high BMIs despite having a healthy weight.
If the function used height cubed or height squared multiplied by
another measurement it might be more accurate.

--
John Gaughan
http://www.johngaughan.net/

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 19:35:55 -0500, "THEMOM1"
> wrote:

>I wouldn't expect to. My scale showes decimal point.

Do the math yourself, then come back with your calculation.
Assuming you know how to properly interpret that formula in the
first place (I suspect you don't).

When I said "I don't even get a whole number" that means less than
the number 1. Make sense now?

BTW: There's nothing more irritating than a top-poster who's
signature is delimited by "--"'s, not to mention a .sig that's 16
lines longer than the actual content of the post.

Good newsreaders won't quote signatures delimited with "--", which
means I can't quote my own post and fix it for normal people to
read properly.

Maybe you should considering fixing this, or not and continue to
be ignorant.

-sw

In article >,
Steve Wertz > wrote:

> On 28 Jan 2004 20:52:27 -0800, (JulieB)
> wrote:
>
> >BMI = your weight in kg/(your height in cm)squared
>
> I don't even get a whole number using that formula.
>
> -sw

It should be height in meters squared. Divide cm by 100. You should
get a number somewhere between 20 and 25 if you're not overweight. An
approximation for those too lazy to convert their height and weight to
metric is weight in lb/(height in inches) squared, then multiplied by
704.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me

In article >,
Nancy Young > wrote:

> PENMART01 wrote:
> >
> > > Nancy Young askes how are obesity statistics compiled:
> > >
> > >(laughing) Okay, I'm done now.
> > >
> > >nancy (just really wondering how these numbers are formulated)
> >
> > Most all major US employers track their emplyee's physical well being via
> > means
> > of periodical medical exams,
>
> Aside from being hired, I have never been forced to take a physical.
> I worked for some major corporations. No one has weighed me in a
> couple of decades.

I have _never_ had to take a physical as part of the hiring process here.

Miche

--
If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud.
-- Arlo Guthrie, "Alice's Restaurant"

In article
>,
Cindy Fuller > wrote:

> Mens' and womens' sizes are entirely different animals.

So are women's sizes and women's sizes.

I recently had to buy quite a bit of clothing as I went from a
jeans-and-tshirt tech job to an office job. At one point I picked up
two pairs of trousers to try on (same store, same range) -- one from the
"plus size" section and one from the "normal size" section. Both said
size 18 on the tag.

The trousers from the "plus size" section were too big around the waist
and hips. The trousers from the "normal size" section fit perfectly.
Remember -- same range, (ostensibly) same size.

That's just appalling.

Miche

--
If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud.
-- Arlo Guthrie, "Alice's Restaurant"

In article >,
Steve Wertz > wrote:

> Good newsreaders won't quote signatures delimited with "--", which
> means I can't quote my own post and fix it for normal people to
> read properly.

The .sig delimiter is actually "-- " -- two dashes and a space.

Miche

--
If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud.
-- Arlo Guthrie, "Alice's Restaurant"

Miche > wrote in news:micheinnz-
:

> I have _never_ had to take a physical as part of the hiring process here.
>
> Miche
>

When My Company hired me almost 30 years ago there was a physical but no
others since then have I had for company reasons.

--
Once during Prohibition I was forced to live for days on nothing but food
and water.
--------
FIELDS, W. C.

In article >,
hahabogus > wrote:

> Miche > wrote in news:micheinnz-
> :
>
> > I have _never_ had to take a physical as part of the hiring process here.
> >
>
> When My Company hired me almost 30 years ago there was a physical but no
> others since then have I had for company reasons.

Meaning insurance reasons?

It's very unusual for jobs to come with medical insurance here.

Miche

--
If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud.
-- Arlo Guthrie, "Alice's Restaurant"

Miche > wrote in news:micheinnz-
:

> Meaning insurance reasons?
>

No, not insurance but Physically fit enough to do the job. I work for a
telco, and in those days you needed to climb poles. Back then it was a
government owned company which also might have played a part. Miche, you
work for the ozzie govrnment don't you? As part of the custom guards I
would have thought a physical or at least a mental check would have
applied. As you might be a nutter and allow fuzzy toads into the country.

--
Once during Prohibition I was forced to live for days on nothing but food
and water.
--------
FIELDS, W. C.

hahabogus > wrote in
:

> Miche > wrote in news:micheinnz-
> :
>
>> Meaning insurance reasons?
>>
>
> No, not insurance but Physically fit enough to do the job. I work for
> a telco, and in those days you needed to climb poles. Back then it was
> a government owned company which also might have played a part. Miche,
> you work for the ozzie govrnment don't you? As part of the custom
> guards I would have thought a physical or at least a mental check
> would have applied. As you might be a nutter and allow fuzzy toads
> into the country.
>

Oops - Miche is a Kiwi (New Zealand), not an Aussie <g>. I work for the
Australian federal government, although in the Quarantine service,
rather than Customs - separate organisations. If you're employed by
either state (or at least NSW, where I worked before the service
transferred back to the Commonwealth) or Commonwealth governments here,
there's a medical examination required. Usually takes place after you've
been appointed to the job, but whilst still on probation. Just the one,
though - no more during the job unless for a specific reason - workers
comp case, problems with illness/excessive sick leave etc. For private
enterprise it would differ from company to company. I worked for a
couple, but that was years ago and don't recall whether there were
medical checks - maybe for very large companies.

No mental health check, though, that I recall - and I certainly have
worked with some very odd people <vbg>.

Rhonda Anderson
Cranebrook, NSW, Australia