Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Nice! Hopefully it counteracts the family history of high blood pressure. Though, given how long-living people in my family are, that might just be the case.
Hillary is death proof!
My wife's diabetic patients have thighs larger than my waist. They die a slow miserable death before 60. As with most things, there is a likely optimum range, not an optimum minimum. Americans have a worldwide reputation for big thighs amongst our females. I don't believe we are any healthier than the other western people who are trimmer.
To Meade:As soon as they get married ... it's all about the "fat thighs make you healthy" articles.Don't buy it my man.Don't buy it.
Well, I'm safe!Actually, I know quite a few really heavy people who carry it all around the middle and they have toothpick legs sticking out the bottom. There *could* be a correlation between where weight is carried and heart disease.
Funny. I don't have big thighs but have outlived all of my other family members who did.I guess I'm an anomaly. But thank God I'm not strung out on mood stabilizers.
Yeah, Synova, I was thinking the same thing. Aren't we really just saying the whole "apple" shape is less healthy? But then they say this: Additionally we found that the risk was more highly related to thigh circumference than to waist circumference.but who knows. They say more highly related, but they are still related.
I'm diabetic (type 2) and in my early 50's and my thighs are exactly what the article says they should be for men.So - what now?Just like every other time I read the latest health news surprise/breakthrough/survey/clinical trial - Yawn, sigh, and go on with my life.
Just to be safe, I've distributed the fat all over my body, proportionately. I have a great hourglass shape... it's just a big hourglass.
LOL at Florida's comment.My motto: No pain; no pain.
For crying out loud, ricpic, you'd think I could open something on this blog and not see some unrelated, unkind thing about a Democrat. What's the connection, really? I sure hope you're the picture of utter beauty or handsomeness, without a wrinkle, an extra ounce of fat or unpleasantly placed deformity for the world to see. But it seems unlikely, given the weaknesses the flesh is heir to. Sheesh.
"... but the researchers said thigh size could be used as a marker for at-risk patients.""At-risk" people already include the overweight, and now they are coming in for the underweight crowd, creating "Standards of Normal", one study at a time.
Junk science says what?
Nice video. I always worry I'm doing the squats wrong, but it looks like I'm doing them ok. I hate lunges, though.
Those researchers came very close to figuring it out, but they needed to take it one step further to get to the bottom of it all.It’s not that big thighs are good for you.It’s that hair between your legs is bad for you.
It’s that hair between your legs is bad for you.Speak for yourself. Nothing is more delicious than a rich, luxuriant bush.Peter
At LAST great news!!I think I WILL have that last piece of Marie Callander Coconut Cream Pie for breakfast after all. I keep trying to convince my hubby that it contains many of the four food groups and is therefore suitable breakfast food.....just like leftover pizza. :-)
This is ridiculous. I ride the exercise bike 45 minutes most every day and there's no way my thighs are ever going to be that large.They need another theory to explain their data.
Does this article say that Hillary Clinton will out live us all.
Correlation is not causation. Repeat to infinity.
Meade, none of those girly-man squats. Learn the proper way
If this is true, American women are in the pink now ...
Post a Comment