Logic or fallacy?
This morning on the radio there was an item which intrigued me. They said that obese people are more in danger of going blind.
Now being a person who is constantly struggling to lose weight you can probably imagine that this alarmed me a little. I'm used to all the things about it being harmful to the joints and dangerous for the heart to carry a lot of extra weight but this was a new one on me.
However, the explanation which followed seemed to be a bit flawed. They went on to say that vitamins which are essential for the retina of the eyes cannot reach there when there is too much fat in the diet.
Ah, so that's 'fat in the diet' as oppsed to 'fat in the body'? Now in my experience, and observing others, the thing which adds weight more than anything else tends to be sugar. How many times do we hear about all those 'empty calories'? Personally I can't stand fatty foods and Busman will tell you how I cut all the fat off meat and give it to him because he loves it and I can't eat more than about half a dozen chips at a time. Given a choice with a meal I go for boiled spuds.
So, shouldn't the announcement have been that people who eat too much fatty food are in danger of going blind rather than that obese people are the ones in danger? I mean you get fat eaters who are not obese don't you and obese people who don't eat fats?
Am I waffling again?
BTW I just bought a new pair of jeans and not only were the size I first selected too large, the next size down was too large too so I must be making progress. Still a long way to go though but it's encouraging.
|