Poor children are more at risk for diabetes (Vote for a Marxist utopia.)

stltoday.com ^ | 07/21/2008 | NA

[neverdem]

Diabetes strikes harder at those who were poor as children, according to a new 30-year study.

Participants who were disadvantaged in youth were more likely to develop diabetes than better-off peers were during the 34-year time frame of the study.

"Our study, among others, shows a strong, persistent effect of childhood socioeconomic position on the development of diabetes in adulthood, even after taking later-life socioeconomic position into account," said Siobhan Maty, an epidemiologist at the Portland State University School of Community Health in Oregon.

Researchers examined health records and studies from 1965 to 1999 of about 5,900 people. Of the people who developed diabetes, 65 percent were from poor households, regardless of their economic conditions later in life. Also, 54 percent of those who developed diabetes were women.

The findings show the link between poverty and diabetes, says Adam Drewnowski, of the University of Washington Center for Obesity Research.

"The fight against obesity and the eradication of poverty are, in fact, one and the same," he said. "It is difficult to design effective weight control strategies without taking the root causes of obesity and diabetes into account."...

[neverdem]

Root causes, hmmm, we don't have to import poverty in the form of illegal aliens with no skills.

Childhood socioeconomic position, gender, adult body mass index, and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus over 34 years in the Alameda County Study.

[autumnraine]

Poorer children eat lots of starches to fill them up. Overloads the pancreas.

Just my non-doctor opinion.

[Blood of Tyrants]

And the cause of them eating more starches is that their lazy unmarried mothers living on food stamps and welfare buy junk foods instead of taking time off from Oprah to prepare a proper meal.

[Blood of Tyrants]

P.S. So therefore, GOVERNMENT causes diabetes in children.

[chris_bdba]

Looks like they are lumping type 2’s with type 1 and pointing to being poor as a cause? Funny, I was living in a brand new 3 bedroom house when I was diagonised at 9yo with type 1, guess I’ve always went agaisnt the grain?

[autumnraine]

I didn’t say anything about welfare, lazy unmarried mothers or food stamps. Alot of people eat starches and aren’t on food stamps. Alot of people aren’t on food stamps which is why they eat poorly.

But however you want to take my comment on why poorer children have a higher risk for diabetes.

[mplsconservative]

Those EBS cards buy a lot of Doritos. It’s the Republicans fault per usual./s

[mplsconservative]

Alot of people aren’t on food stamps which is why they eat poorly.

You have got to be kidding!

[autumnraine]

No, I’m not. So you have no respect for people who aren’t making so little they can get, or even better, refuse to get on food stamps? That they might be the ones who are eating starchier foods. How many threads have I read on here lamenting on how people on food stamps eat better than they do. But now when that article doesn’t suit your purpose, just the opposite is true?

So yes, some people do eat poorly because they aren’t on food stamps, for whatever reason. And by poorly, I mean making the starches stretch.

[autumnraine]

Take your argument baiting somewhere else.

[mplsconservative]

Thought you’d get a kick out of this. LOL!

[mplsconservative]

Hey newbie, there’s something called food shelves, gardening, spending money wisely.

BTW, FR is a discussion forum. Argument baiting, or whatever you call it, is half the fun! Get over yourself.

[Gabz]

Some things just leave one scratching their head.

Correlation does NOT equal causation.

[mplsconservative]

Don’t you dare bring logic to this discussion. :)

[Gabz]

But it’s FUN!!!

[FORTRUTHONLY]

Hey newbie, there’s something called food shelves, gardening, spending money wisely. BTW, FR is a discussion forum. Argument baiting, or whatever you call it, is half the fun! Get over yourself.

While I do agree with your argument and I do think you are 100% right, her being a "newbie" is irrelevant (as a "newbie" myself), it is her lack or facts which makes her weak in this argument and not her FR "birth date". :)

[mplsconservative]

LOL! You changed your tagline. :( It was one of my favorites. Hope your gardening is going well.

We’re tight on money these days but the ol’ garden is doing well warding off diabetes. Zucchini, acorn squash, tomatoes, raspberries, peppers and such are all in abundance. It’s a glorious time of year!

I’m very grateful to have the space to garden. I know not all folks are so blessed. I just find it hard to believe people have to live on starches. Heck, strawberries were $1.48 a pound here last week.

Getting down from soapbox now...LOL

[mplsconservative]

Sorry FTO, sometimes I can’t help myself. Autumnraine seems like a decent sort. Hang around for awhile and you’ll be tempted yourself. Welcome to FR. It’s a great place! :)

[FORTRUTHONLY]

The temptation is there, it's quite evident but the newbie term is quite a turnoff and a disappointing term for newcomers. I almost left FR because of a myriad of arguments which they were strictly based on my FR birth date. However, I did manage to encounter some wonderful people who changed my mind on my leaving the forum and I am grateful to them for convincing me to stay. :)

[autumnraine]

I accept. I just wanted to make my point clear that I wasn’t saying it is or isn’t the “government’s fault”. My mom fed me lots of biscuits, grits and other cheap starches and was never on food stamps. That was all my point was. I don’t think I’m alone in that statistic.

But thanks for the welcome!