XKit Extension for Tumblr!

Something clever goes here

socimages:

Overweight Americans have the lowest risk of premature death.
By Lisa Wade, PhD
Last year the Journal of the American Medical Association released a study aiming to determine the relationship between body mass index and the risk of premature death. Body mass index, or BMI, is the ratio between your height and weight. According to the National Institutes of Health, you are “normal weight” if your ratio is between 18.5-24.9.  Everything over that is “overweight” or “obese” and everything under is “underweight.”
This study was a meta-analysis, which is an analysis of a collection of existing studies that systematically measures the sum of our knowledge.  In this case, the authors analyzed 97 studies that included a combined 2.88 million individuals and over 270,000 deaths.  They found that overweight individuals had a lower risk of premature death than so-called normal weight individuals and there was no relationship between being somewhat obese and the rate of early death. Only among people in the high range of obesity was there a correlation between their weight and a higher risk of premature death.
Here’s what it looked like.
Above is two columns of studies plotted according to the hazard ratio they reported for people.  This comparison is between people who are “overweight” (BMI = 25-29.9) and people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9).  Studies that fall below the line marked 1.0 found a lower rate of premature death and studies above the line found a higher rate.
Just by eyeballing it, you can confirm that there is not a strong correlation between weight and premature death, at least in this population. When the scientists ran statistical analyses, the math showed that there is a statistically significant relationship between being “overweight” and a lower risk of death.
Here’s the same data, but comparing the risk of premature death among people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are somewhat “obese” (BMI = 30-34.9).  Again, eyeballing the results suggest that there’s not much correlation and, in fact, statistical analysis found none.

Finally, here are the results comparing “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are quite “obese” (BMI = 35 or higher). In this case, we do see a relationship between risk of premature death in body weight.

It’s almost funny that the National Institutes of Health use the word normal when talking about BMI. It’s certainly not the norm – the average BMI in the U.S. falls slightly into the “overweight” category (26.6 for adult men and 25.5 for adult women) — and it’s not related to health. It’s clearly simply normative. It’s related to a socially constructed physical ideal that has little relationship to what physicians and public health advocates are supposed to be concerned with.  Normal is judgmental, but if they changed the word to healthy, they have to entirely rejigger their prescriptions.
So, do we even have an obesity epidemic? Perhaps not if we use health as a marker instead of some arbitrary decision to hate fat.  Paul Campos, covering this story for the New York Times, points out:

If the government were to redefine normal weight as one that doesn’t increase the risk of death, then about 130 million of the 165 million American adults currently categorized as overweight and obese would be re-categorized as normal weight instead.

That’s 79%.
It’s worth saying again: if we are measuring by the risk of premature death, then 79% of the people we currently shame for being overweight or obese would be recategorized as perfectly fine. Ideal, even. Pleased to be plump, let’s say, knowing that a body that is a happy balance of soft and strong is the kind of body that will carry them through a lifetime.
Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the co-author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

socimages:

Overweight Americans have the lowest risk of premature death.

By Lisa Wade, PhD

Last year the Journal of the American Medical Association released a study aiming to determine the relationship between body mass index and the risk of premature death. Body mass index, or BMI, is the ratio between your height and weight. According to the National Institutes of Health, you are “normal weight” if your ratio is between 18.5-24.9.  Everything over that is “overweight” or “obese” and everything under is “underweight.”

This study was a meta-analysis, which is an analysis of a collection of existing studies that systematically measures the sum of our knowledge.  In this case, the authors analyzed 97 studies that included a combined 2.88 million individuals and over 270,000 deaths.  They found that overweight individuals had a lower risk of premature death than so-called normal weight individuals and there was no relationship between being somewhat obese and the rate of early death. Only among people in the high range of obesity was there a correlation between their weight and a higher risk of premature death.

Here’s what it looked like.

Above is two columns of studies plotted according to the hazard ratio they reported for people.  This comparison is between people who are “overweight” (BMI = 25-29.9) and people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9).  Studies that fall below the line marked 1.0 found a lower rate of premature death and studies above the line found a higher rate.

Just by eyeballing it, you can confirm that there is not a strong correlation between weight and premature death, at least in this population. When the scientists ran statistical analyses, the math showed that there is a statistically significant relationship between being “overweight” and a lower risk of death.

Here’s the same data, but comparing the risk of premature death among people who are “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are somewhat “obese” (BMI = 30-34.9).  Again, eyeballing the results suggest that there’s not much correlation and, in fact, statistical analysis found none.

30-34.9

Finally, here are the results comparing “normal weight” (BMI = 18.5-24.9) and people who are quite “obese” (BMI = 35 or higher). In this case, we do see a relationship between risk of premature death in body weight.

35

It’s almost funny that the National Institutes of Health use the word normal when talking about BMI. It’s certainly not the norm – the average BMI in the U.S. falls slightly into the “overweight” category (26.6 for adult men and 25.5 for adult women) — and it’s not related to health. It’s clearly simply normative. It’s related to a socially constructed physical ideal that has little relationship to what physicians and public health advocates are supposed to be concerned with.  Normal is judgmental, but if they changed the word to healthy, they have to entirely rejigger their prescriptions.

So, do we even have an obesity epidemic? Perhaps not if we use health as a marker instead of some arbitrary decision to hate fat.  Paul Campos, covering this story for the New York Times, points out:

If the government were to redefine normal weight as one that doesn’t increase the risk of death, then about 130 million of the 165 million American adults currently categorized as overweight and obese would be re-categorized as normal weight instead.

That’s 79%.

It’s worth saying again: if we are measuring by the risk of premature death, then 79% of the people we currently shame for being overweight or obese would be recategorized as perfectly fine. Ideal, even. Pleased to be plump, let’s say, knowing that a body that is a happy balance of soft and strong is the kind of body that will carry them through a lifetime.

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the co-author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

(via urmomlol)

Source: socimages

"[John Vanderslice] said, “If you think the Internet is making us lonelier, then you were never lonely before 1995.” That’s fucking deep, right? You know what you no longer have to do? Sit in your room with nothing. There is someone, even if it’s just some dude arguing about Alien Vs. Predator, right?"

- John Darnielle, on loneliness in the internet age. [x] (via herminegottlieb)

(via iatrogenic)

Source: zapp645


This picture, taken at a presentation by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has gone viral on Twitter in the wake of emergency legislation being pushed through parliament.
Metadata is often dismissed by politicians because it doesn’t include the content of a phone call or email, only basic details such as when the conversation took place and who it involved. But this picture demonstrates why it is important.
It comes as the government rushes through an emergency bill to force mobile phone companies and internet providers to record the metadata of citizens’ communications.
The draft legislation was introduced yesterday with cross-party support and MPs are expected to pass the bill on Tuesday.

This picture, taken at a presentation by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has gone viral on Twitter in the wake of emergency legislation being pushed through parliament.

Metadata is often dismissed by politicians because it doesn’t include the content of a phone call or email, only basic details such as when the conversation took place and who it involved. But this picture demonstrates why it is important.

It comes as the government rushes through an emergency bill to force mobile phone companies and internet providers to record the metadata of citizens’ communications.

The draft legislation was introduced yesterday with cross-party support and MPs are expected to pass the bill on Tuesday.

(via vaspider)

Source: iandsharman

geardrops:

alfred sassyworth

(via vaspider)

Source: rossthenerd

  • Question: So, I know that all games/animations are rendered in polygons (triangles), but what do you do when you want to render a sphere? I've seen programs/games with 3D spheres, that seem perfect to the naked eye. Now, a perfect sphere would require infinite polygons, which would take infinite computing power to render. Are these spheres just regular old models that only look like they are perfect because the polygons are so small on the model, or is there some sort of programming trickery involved? - Anonymous
  • Answer:

    sorenkalla:

    askagamedev:

    It’s trickery, and it’s actually a pretty interesting trick. What you’re seeing is the combined effects of shading and normal mapping

    Shading is when the renderer uses positional data to calculate the color of a particular pixel on screen. There are a number of different techniques for this with differing results. Here is the first one, using a technique called “Flat Shading”. Flat shading is when the renderer adjusts the color of a polygon surface based on what it determines the color of the center of the polygon is.

    image

    You can pick out the individual polygons pretty easily here, right?

    Now we’ll switch to a different shading technique. This one is called Phong shading. Instead of using the center of the polygon to determine what color the polygon is, the renderer will take the color value from the corners of each polygon and interpolate between them and the color value from the center of the polygon. This results in shading that is much more gradual and smooth, as you can see here:

    image

    If you look closely, you can see that the number of polygons here actually hasn’t changed. You should still be able to pick out the vertices along the outline of the “sphere” here. But it certainly looks a lot rounder, doesn’t it?

    But this still has issues, because we might have something that’s very polygon-intensive, like a cobblestone street. This poses a problem - we want streets to be flat in terms of polygons, because it’s a street and you walk on it, but it should still visually look like cobblestones. You don’t want to spend extra GPU cycles rendering extra polygons for the street when you could spend them on hair or fingers or facial expressions or something, but you don’t want it to look flat either. So how do you fix this?

    Have you ever seen the movie Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade? There was a scene in the movie where Indy has to take a step out into what looks like a bottomless gorge:

    image

    But he’s not really stepping onto a bottomless gorge, is he? If you look closely, you can see it. When you change the angle of the camera, you can easily see what’s actually going on:

    image

    The step of faith here is actually a cleverly painted (and flat) bridge to make it look like there’s a huge drop. From the viewer’s perspective, it looks 3D even if it actually isn’t. And since we have a computer fast enough to do all the calculations for us every frame, we can make it calculate what the 3D surface would look like from different angles and repaint it on the fly, even if the polygon we’re displaying is actually still flat.

    This is called bump mapping (or often normal mapping, which is a specific kind of bump mapping). The way it works is that you apply a texture like this to the polygon, but instead of being directly displayed on the polygon, it’s used by the renderer to determine the way the pixel at that point should look in terms of height, even if the polygon is flat at that point. It simulates a bunch of different heights or depths, even though the polygon is still actually flat. The result is what you see to the top right - lighting as if it were bumpy or pock marked, but without actually needing additional polygons to get the visual effect.

    The results of this can be pretty interesting. Take a look at these. This is a model with a lot of polygons in it to create a bunch of different shapes:

    image

    And here is a completely flat polygon with a normal map based off of the above shape applied to it:

    image

    You can see that the stuff that really sticks out far like the cone doesn’t look right, but the stuff that only pokes out a little bit like the donut and the hemisphere actually look pretty good for taking up no additional polygons at all. If you looked at both of them from directly above, without the side angle view, it’d actually be pretty tough to tell them apart without touching them. And that’s the point - it’s a way to fake heights and depths without adding extra polygons. This is why it works best on flat surfaces like walls and the ground that you view from (nearly) straight on:

    image

    These are both flat polygon roads, but the right side looks a lot more like it’s made of real stones than the left. There are other effects also at play, like specular maps (which are used to calculate how shiny/reflective or dull an object is) and more, but they also operate on the same sort of mathematical principles.

    It takes a good artist to create the proper map textures for 3D models, and it takes a graphics programmer with a solid understanding of math to create the renderer that can do all of the proper calculations to take those maps and figure out exactly what color each pixel actually is. I will say that it can be pretty fascinating stuff.

    as a cs major i just took a graphics course last quarter

    cool to see such an informative post like this on my dash :) in my class we had to do things like phong shading , specular highlighting, texture maps, calculating normals, etc

Source: askagamedev

thefrogman:

[video] [h/t: sizvideos]

(via iatrogenic)

Source: sizvideos

Text

iatrogenic:

therealoliviabenson:

kingsleyyy:

i’m thankful my childhood was filled with imagination and bruises from playing outside, instead of apps and how many damn likes you get on a picture

kids can do both…… you can do multiple things as a child….

my childhood (which was early 90s for the most part) was filled with imagination and playing outside and then sharing the stories and things I thought up and experiences I had with my friends, all of whom were on the internet because literally everyone in school tortured me.

giving kids more opportunity to have interactions with people not near them in person is always going to be a good thing. I remain forever grateful to my parents for teaching me usenet and IRC, where I also learned about M*ing and now have the best friends I could ever have, two of whom I am with right now — one of them I’ve actually known for over half of my life. 

don’t really care either way about debates about video games and shit, let kids do what they’re gonna do and encourage all sorts of activities, but as far as childhoods being spent on the internet? those were the good parts of an otherwise really, really terrible childhood.

this ^^^

That and considering how structured and circumscribed the lives of kids in the newest generation are, online is basically the only place left for unstructured social interaction.

And we can all agree that that’s useful for learning social skills, yes?

Don’t hate what you don’t need, luddites.

Source: kingsleyyy

cracked:

dontsitaround:

Everybody deserves someone in their life who looks at them the way Soren looks at Daniel in Cracked After Hours.

They get cuter from there.

Be careful or y’all are going to get a slash fic written about them.

Source: dontsitaround

medievalpoc:

Medievalpoc Presents: History of POC in Math and Science Week, 8-3-14 through 8-9-14!

Medievalpoc’s first Patreon Milestone Goal has been reached, and the History of POC in Math and Science Week is happening soon! This all-new themed week will focus on the contribution of people of color to the fields of mathematics, science, physics, medicine, natural philosophy, and much, much more!

There will be a focus on primary documents with interactive elements, visual and documentary evidence, innovators and their biographies, and notable personages of color from the Islamic Golden Age, Medieval Europe, African Empires and Universities, Asian images and texts, and discussion about early modern globalization regarding how this knowledge traveled.

If you have an article, image, document, or commentary you would like to submit, here’s your chance to weigh in on this topic! Please use the “Math and Science Week” and any other relevant tags for your submission, and I look forward to hearing about your favorite mathematicians and scientists of color!

Source: medievalpoc

medievalpoc:

sourcedumal:

note-a-bear:

ooooooh

OOOH LOOK AT THAT HISTORICAL ACCURACY THO

In which fantasy fiction with characters of color is subjected to the “historical accuracy” test and comes out on top once again…

(fyi this is the author of The Throne of the Crescent Moon, which has been featured for Fiction Week previously)

image

Source: everythingrhymeswithalcohol