Obesity seems not to be the deadly sin we once thought. Well, what some people once thought. I am happy to see a reasonable explanation of why BMI is a moronic metric.
Given the usual pattern of medical research there will doubtless be a new study released soon which "proves" the exact opposite.
Margarine is good then bad then good. I have no idea where we are on red wine these days or aspirin.... and I begin to suspect the term "quack" is not yet redundant.
Of course, we could, for a time, end up with the idea that being both fat and thin are both equally bad but what concerns is the width of the band in the middle considered healthy. If any deviation at all from the BMI ideal is bad we are in trouble. If fat and thin are real extremes I can go and have a nice dinner.
I do hope we are as critical of RR<2.0 when the RR supports our preconceived contrarian ideas as with those that don't.
@JamesV -- I am every bit as critical of such studies. The most important part of this article for me was that they demonstrated what I consider a correct analysis of BMI.
There is some hope that when "thinness" is seen as "unhealthy" someone will wakeup and realize the fundamental means of analysis is flawed.
RRs greater than 2.0 don't cause me to get too excited anymore except that they are rare enough to be interesting just because they are so rare.
The recent link between Oral Sex and Oral Cancer taught a most important lesson.
"Be most finicky about who you have sex with... "
Avoiding sex with people who have HPV is the key, NOT necessarily avoiding having oral sex.