Topic: USA - Federal study on lesbian obesity costs $3 million (Read 1084 times)

Just one study among many that wasted taxpayers money.

The reason I believe most University researches are just another form of welfare paycheck.

They spent $3 million on such dump research? That's crazy. What a waste of money!

I really doubt a lesbian's going to vote Democrat, now, just because the current government allowed $600k/yr for this study. Many youth sports programs are open to everyone - no cuts, because they're increasingly looked at as a benefit for the kids, not just a revenue/prestige generator for schools like football and basketball, so many schools around here also have all sorts of relatively obscure sports programs, now, from tennis to golf to bowling. "Affirmative action" should be irrelevant. I'd guess it's psychological. -Or does obesity tend to cause a girl or woman to "become" a lesbian? -And then are obese kids less likely to join a sports program?

Interestingly, since Red states tend to have some of the highest % of obese people, lesbians, I'd guess, are least likely from the LGBT group to vote Dem even though we generally consider women (and LGBT as a whole) to be a Blue contributor. Lesbians probably aren't as moved by the abortion issue, either, which I'd guess would also take away a major reason to vote Dem if they view it as hetero women's rights vs. fetus rights rather than women vs. Patriarchy. Maybe Republicans should be working closely with fat lesbians and strictly gay men, then continue railing against the rest of the LGBT community as God-mocking freaks. ........... ......... ....... 

SJW and professional sports is going nowhere... You are born with it, or not. Gay or not. They fail to understand that.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/rams/2014/09/01/michael-sam-not-signed-to-st-louis-practice-squad/14935237/

Vote bank politics. 3 million $$$ wasted just to attract a few hundred lesbian votes. No wonder that the American public debt is snowballing every second or so. Sexual minorities are 46 to 76 percent less likely to be on an athletic team... so what they are going to do about that? Create special affirmative action quotas for these people in the athletic teams?

I have a really hard time believing the US hunger statistics. I've never heard of a state where their food stamp/SNAP program isn't unreasonably generous, ignoring WIC and free/subsidized school lunch. We took SNAP for a few months in PA when we had our daughter and they gave us something ridiculous like $600/mo. Unless you're only buying frozen pizzas at a gas station, I don't know how anyone could go hungry. I'd say there're sure cases where people fall through the cracks due to the income requirements (among others, certainly including citizenship) in some states, but 50M... I just don't see it, and I've lived in poor areas both urban and rural... but furthest South I've lived was in North Carolina.

As a kid, my mom had a rough patch where she wouldn't have qualified for food stamps (as they were back then), so instead, we simply went to a local organization where they bring a semi around each week and let people take as they need - no fuss, and it was decent food, too, not just potatoes and rice. This kind of generosity doesn't exist everywhere, though, surely.

World Hunger claims a more believable 7M figure which I don't mean to suggest is "good" or reasonable given the government has far more than enough money to cover the remaining hungry (which, really, would be an increase looking, relatively, like peanuts compared to US "defense" spending, or the amount we spend on the War on Drugs), but I don't think it's really a matter of money, just assholes in government "taking a stand" (on a very limited number of issues).

There's plenty of fat to be cut in government budgets, too. A few years ago, the local school district received ~$140k to give 6th graders iPads. Outside Apple products having very little market share in business (and their computer tech courses, without reason, spend a large portion of time having kids follow Photoshop tutorials), a large percentage of kids in this rural community don't have access to broadband Internet access. Just imagine the economic opportunity available to kids, and the ability to retain graduates, if the money went toward just expanding DSL access instead (kids here currently, without possibility of remote work, have the options of stripping, cleaning our elders' shit, cleaning horse shit, and working at the local union-hostile factory which treats employees like cattle). I ramble, again, only to suggest it's really not about money, just malice and incompetence.

Kind of a weird parallax though when you think about the fact that apparently a lot of Americans are starving and yet obesity rates are high
Must be all the junk food or the wasted food somehow going to Lesbian obesity studies instead of more productive ventures like general obsesity studies or simply food distribution   (would say aid but if people are fat and others are starving perhaps its more logistcal)

http://www.epa.gov/foodrecovery/
Social Benefits
Feed People, Not Landfills - An estimated 50 million Americans do not have access to enough food. Organizations can donate safe and healthy food to a food bank or food rescue organization and both reduce food sent to landfills and feed those in need.

It could be helpful in determining specific ways to deal with obesity. A single bypass runs $100-200k (uninsured -- I'd guess costs skyrocket otherwise), much more if a significant stay's required. There are worse... A couple cases of serious, long-term diabetes prevented where patients would've been on Obamacare/Medicaid could easily recoup the money being spent here. Then there's obesity-related cancer, of course.

Particularly, the lack of athletic involvement among lesbians is something the government can take large steps in correcting. The government tends to disregard athletics, but this may suggest there's good cause to direct more funding at youth and adult sports. The news alone, if the media didn't turn it into a shitstorm, could be useful being published in trying to encourage adults to push lesbian children into a sports program.

Useful or not (and I really doubt the study's conclusions will be as general and useless as "lesbians don't generally play sports and are fat"), as long as the NIH can justify continuing to receive money, it's more pressure to cut spending in far more terrible areas. Not much, but it's better than giving the budget in general more wiggle room to direct toward the War on Everything (though.... shit... they call this the "war on obesity," don't they?).

Because lesbian obesity is a seperate category of normal obesity
Really seems like a complete waste of the taxpayer dollar then again random studies seem to be what the gov is best at lol 1 dataset for everyone to share XD.
In a topic few note lol.

That's more impressive at least, the numbers, but yeah, to be honest, sounds like something a religious lobby would put together to attack homosexuals really especially if there's no links to the actual study, you could just as easily find that amount of data on straight people because obesity rates are at an all time high.

"over 47,000 youth" - http://projectreporter.nih.gov/project_info_description.cfm?aid=8703150&icde=21539564

Having trouble finding the actual study, though.

woman + food = no problem

woman + woman + food = obesity lesbian problem

Where the fuck are the sampling numbers? What a shitty article!

It seems rather stupid, admittedly
But I would imagine many such studies of marginal utility are undertaken, which then makes it tricky to decide which ones should and which ones shouldn't be funded at all

Patriarchy strikes again.

  I should be mad at the waste of money but this is just fucking stupid.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/31/federal-study-lesbian-obesity-hits-3-million/