Fall 2022 Mid-Term Obesity Test Solutions From University Of Oregon
Revise these 2022 mid-term obesity test solutions from the University of Oregon for free and gain skills to solve your next tegst. We have the best genetics test takers ready to serve you similar solutions incase you’re stuck with a test. Pay for biology exam assistance from us and you’ll never regret your descision.
What Is Regarded As Obesity?
Who is overweight? Or, rather, what is overweight, and might not average weight itself be overweight? Is it normal or correct for middle-aged spread to occur, and how thick should thick-set people permit themselves to be? The most telling definition takes as its premise that the right weight to be is the one associated with maximum longevity. No one is so single-minded about survival as the insurance companies, and no insurance company is as good as the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (of the United States) at producing biologically intriguing statistics.
Desirable weight, according to its figures, is within 10% of one's weight when twenty-five years old. To be 20% heavier means being overweight, and anything greater is defined as obesity. Therefore three people weighing, 9, 11 and 13 stone (or 57, 70, and 82-5 kgs.) at twenty-five will have reached the 20% category when their respective weights have crept up to 10 stone 11 lbs. (68: 5 kgs.), 13 stone 3 lbs. (84 kgs.), and 15 stone 8 lbs. (99 kgs.). Similarly, to be within 10% of the twenty-five-year-old weight means that the maximum permitted additions to the 9, 11, and 13 stone people are respectively 121 lbs. (5.7 kgs.), 151 lbs. (7 kg.) and 18 lbs. (8.2 kg.).
There are other more subjective definitions. One is to look in a mirror. Another is to stand naked before wives, husbands, lovers, or mistresses and demand their genuine opinion. A third (for men) is to make certain that waist measurement is at least 2 ins. (5 cms.) less than deflated chest measurement. A fourth is to squeeze a fold of skin from such fat-potential areas as the side of the lower chest, the back of the upper arm, or just below the shoulder blade: if the fold is more than 1 in. (2-5 cms.) thick it is bluntly said that you are fat.
Finally, there are charts, which have usually been compiled with the aid of insurance morbidity data. The charts divide humanity into ectomorphs, mesomorphs, and endomorphs (see page 301), or small, medium, and large frames, and allow for the disparity between the three. The desirable weight, for example, of a 6 ft. (1-8 m.) man is permitted to vary between 10 stone 8 lbs. (67 kgs.) (light end of small frame) to 13 stone 2 lbs. (83-5 kgs.) (heavy end of large frame). What is not permitted is for either a small frame man or a medium man to regard himself suddenly as being in a larger frame category merely because he has put on weight. The frame will not change in life; it is the poundage hanging on to it that differs.
How Do Overweight Men Compare To Women, Generally?
Women are overweight more frequently than men. Figures exist suggesting that one-third of all American women over thirty are at least 10% heavier than the standard weight, and 75% of women between forty-five and fifty-five are said to be overweight. Men tend to become heavier later than women, but between forty-five and fifty-five half of them are said to be overweight. There is thought to be less fatness in Britain, and the sex difference is less marked. Of course, men in offices put on weight more decidedly, roughly 2 stone (12-7 kgs.) more decidedly than manual workers; but women are contrary, for it is the manual lady who is fatter than the professional one- on average. (As a digression I wonder if women do see themselves as those very long, thin, and elegant creatures dressed so beautifully in shop windows. Adel Rootstein Ltd, who makes many of these models produce a standard size-5 ft. 8 ins. (1-7 m.) to the hair- line, 34 ins. (86 cms.) bust and hips, 24 ins. (61 cms.) waist. There must be extraordinarily few real women with such long and thin dimensions.)
What Causes Obesity In Children?
Fat children are more than likely to grow up into fat people; 80% of them do so. Similarly, 30% of fat adults can remember being fat in childhood. A recent survey showed that when both parents are overweight, three-quarters of their children will be; when neither parent is overweight, 9% of their children will be. Once again both heredity and environment must be playing an interwoven part. Is this child fat because its genes promote fatness or because its household customarily fattens up the inhabitants? The problem is not simple; most children in Britain consume more calories and more carbohydrates than they require, yet only a few become obese. Mothers generally welcome rotund children and deplore skinny ones. At the Institute of Child Health in London more visiting mothers express anxiety about possibly being underweight than possibly overweight. Baby show prize-givers tend to favor the rotund babies, not the slim ones, and the prize-winners then chuckle into their deep-set dimples.
What Are Your Suggestions For Reducing Obesity In Children?
Making young children thinner is a distinct problem, with a general feeling that any treatment before five is unprofitable. Even then diets are liable to be unsuccessful unless the whole family takes part. The best hope of success, according to a leader in the British Medical Journal, is to persuade the mother to reduce the calories in general, by giving meals richer in protein, and poorer in carbohydrates. The older the fat child the greater the chance of persuading the child to take personal steps to reduce his or her intake.
The control of appetite and the acquisition, retention, and disposal of food is, despite some obesity, remarkably well controlled. An individual is likely to process 30-40 tons of food through his system in his adult lifetime, and yet remain within 5 or 10 lbs. (2:3 or 4-5 kgs.) of a certain figure on his bathroom scales. The so-called appestat, or appetite control center, is pre-summed, with good reason, to exist in the hypothalamus, the small portion of the brain which lies underneath the cerebrum. If a small central portion of a rat's hypothalamus is deliberately attacked with needles the animal recovers from the anesthetic to start voracious eating. Sure enough, within a few weeks, the rat is very fat. Should two lateral portions of the hypothalamus be destroyed instead, the animal will not eat at all. Occasionally a human being will suffer injury to his hypothalamus, notably when a tumor is growing nearby, and obesity may follow. However, most very fat people reveal no such detectable lesion at post-mortem, and a full understanding of the appestat's mechanism or method of control is a long way from being grasped. How can it possibly know when a meal has proved sufficient? What information can it possibly acquire that leads it to interpret so accurately one's needs of the day?
What Are Your Suggestions For Fighting Obesity, Generally?
Medically, fatness is to be deplored. Not only is there an association between extra weight and shorter lives, but it is linked with a great incidence of high blood pressure, arterial disease, liver and kidney disease, varicose veins, and a small regiment of other ailments, including obvious associations such as tiredness and shortness of breath. (Know the grave doth gape for thee thrice wider than for other men, wrote Shakespeare of the fat all those centuries ago.)
Journalistically, fatness is to be welcomed. Slimming articles are excellent value, and there is more than a battalion of slimming notions. Professor John Yudkin, the London nutritionist, has written that he is astounded at the way new slimming nonsense bobs up as soon as he believes he has scotched the previous batch. He has written pungently of those which slim you only where you wish to slim, which surround you with marine plankton, which allegedly works while you relax in the bath. He has summed up the whole dieting question by dividing it into three.
- Low fat diet-likely to lead to hunger, irritability, bad skin, poor concentration, and possible unhealthiness.
- Low protein diet - average British intake of protein is 95 gms. daily. The authorities agree it should not be less than 70. There- for a saving of 25 gms. a day-only of 100 calories is possible, but ineffective.
- Low carbohydrate diet - the easiest kind. The average consumption is 400 gms. - or 1,600 calories a day. Refined sugars are responsible for much of the excess. Some slimming schemes remove sugar and then replace it with glucose, honey, or sorbitol. These three give, weight for weight, the same calories as sugar, but are less sweet. Therefore more is taken, and therefore more calories than before being absorbed.
Is Slimming Achievable After Obesity?
The real slimmers are quite a different matter. These are the huge people who try and get the weight down to a level when they will again require just one chair to sit on. Recently, instead of giving them modest diets, some have been given nothing at all - just vitamins, minerals, and water. Sometimes the routine is only marginally less severe. Take the case of William J. Cobb, born in Georgia. In 1962 he weighed 802 lbs. (or 57 stone 4 lbs., or 364 kilos), and a struggling circulatory system was failing to supply enough oxygen; every few steps he had to stop and rest awhile. In one sense 200 lbs. (90 kgs.) the man was carrying an extra 600 lbs. (272 kgs.) around with him; small wonder that the load proved excessive.
He decided to slim. Manfully he reduced his weight to 644 lbs. (292 kgs.) and then volunteered for obesity research in an Augusta hospital. This meant a far stricter regimen. He was permitted no exercise, and merely 1,000 calories a day. (Don't forget he was four or five times normal size, and therefore with a far greater basic need of calories.) The diet varied between high protein, high fat, and high carbohydrate diets, and every eight weeks he was shifted from one to another. After eighty-three weeks he left the hospital, and was soon working as a shoe repairer: his weight-a dainty 232 lbs. (106 kgs.), proving a weight loss equivalent to the combined weights of three large men or five slim women.
Starvation is accompanied, apart from the loss of weight, by a senile appearance of the skin, a slow heartbeat, shortness of breath if exercise is attempted, increasing urination, and a general swelling, or edema, of the tissues. This retention of liquid is a feature of most starved people and occurs mainly in the legs, ankles, feet, and abdomen. It often gives a reasonably well-nourished look to the lower half of the body compared to the skinny chest and spindly arms. Diarrhea may follow or partner with edema. Normally, starvation is so frequent in the world that average findings have been easily evaluated, a person can shrink to half of his or her weight, and still be perfectly capable of putting on all former weight if given food. When weight is less than 50% of its original amount death is much more likely. Its actual cause will probably be some infection, itself permitted by a lack of resistance to infection which, in its turn, is caused by a deficiency of protein.
C. J. Polson in The Essentials of Forensic Medicine has listed some of the post-mortem findings of starved people. Body weight is usually well below half normal weight (on average 38%). An 11-stone (70 kgs.) man and an 8-stone (51 kgs.) woman may therefore have been reduced to 4 stone (25.4 kgs.) and 3 stone (19 kgs.). They look old. All organs except the brain have shrunk both in size and weight. No fat is visible, and all muscles have atrophied. There has been de-mineralization of bone.
Between the starved human being and the obese one lies a fantastic margin of viability. If a starved man of 8 stone (51 kgs.) can fall to 4 stone (25-4 kgs.) and live, and if William J. Cobb can swell up to 802 lbs. (364 kgs.) and also live, there is a gap of 746 lbs. (338-6 kgs.) between these two living adult human beings. One is over fourteen times the weight of the other. Between a highly emaciated woman and Mr. Cobb, the differential factor is nearer nineteen. There is a huge range in the potential weight of Homo sapiens.
What Is The Significance Of Cooking Food?
Cooking The Hadza of Tanzania is a small tribe living near Lake Eyasi. All their food is either gathered or hunted. They cultivate nothing and store nothing. However, they do cook, crudely, briefly, and badly. They throw a piece of meat into the fire, remove it later, and chew away at it. As a tribe, they are probably typical of countless tribal people who existed in the days before agriculture and animal husbandry, and who were our ancestors. They were primitive, nomadic, and casual, and yet they did cook. The practice was initiated, it is believed, virtually as soon as the fire was controlled.
Cooking performs various roles. It can improve flavor, as with meats. It can help to liberate substances that stimulate the secretion of digestive juices. It can break down and loosen connective fibers, as with the collagen fibers of the meat and the cellulose framework of vegetables. It can also kill bacteria and parasites within the food; think of measly pork' and trichinosis, It does not always increase digestibility; raw meat is said to be most easily digested if kept raw but well disintegrated. Cooking helps to achieve that disintegration; but overcooking, causing a shrinkage of the coagulated protein, can decrease the digestibility. Some foods, like meats, have less water in them after cooking; some, like rice, have more.
A general estimate is that 10% of the energy value of foods is lost by cooking, but many contend that the loss is much less. Undeniably some vitamins are lost in cooking, notably B, and C. All B and C vitamins are soluble in water, and so are likely to be lost in the surrounding water. All other vitamins are soluble in fat. Vitamin C, the fruit vitamin, is particularly liable to destruction by heat. Because vegetables possess enzymes that can destroy vitamins, and because these act more speedily if warmed up, the slow warming of a vegetable can lead to much. vitamin loss. A better practice is to plunge the vegetable into boiling water (or hot fat), thereby destroying the enzymes.
The Hadza do indeed cook. However, throwing an impala's head onto an open fire, and then peeling off the charred meat a few later, is about as different as could be from the near-religious devotion that the art of cooking evokes in some households. It has to start somewhere, and that burnt antelope head is nearer to tradition for mankind's stomach than a delicate soufflé threatening to tremble into humiliating collapse.
Briefly Discuss Food poisoning
Food poisoning has three sub-divisions. The food can be contaminated with poison; it can be poisonous food; it can have been contaminated by pathogenic bacteria. The first is customarily considered as wilful malevolence on someone's part. The second, with so much advisory folklore, is generally obviated these days. The third is almost always the fault of the staphylococci, the streptococci, and the salmonellae - plus the person who permitted them to grow, or who failed to kill them off.
Their presence is insidious. They do not change the taste or smell of food (although other non-pathogenic forms may have simultaneously caused detectable putrefaction). They can all give rise to equally direct, emphatic, and short-lived attacks of food poisoning. Mere decay, without a corresponding density of the three pathogenic forms, is generally harmless. Many foods are intolerable without some putrefaction; fruits have to ripen, and so do cheeses, so does game which is best eaten high, and - for Eskimos - so does fish. Many inland communities also prefer their fish with a tang to it, accustomed as they are to well-traveled cod and herring.
Clostridium botulinum is a big exception to all the rules. For one thing, it can often kill. Its virulent poison is always referred to in discussions of biological warfare (for instance, it has been stated that a one-inch cube of botulinus toxin would be sufficient to kill everybody in North America). Some 65% of botulism cases are fatal. Fortunately, the bacillus cannot (usually) multiply without liberating a noxious smell and, equally fortunately, fifteen minutes of boiling will destroy all the toxins and the bacteria. The spores are made of sterner stuff, but even they yield to steam under pressure. Commercially botulism has been defeated, with the last industrial contamination in both Britain and the United States occurring in the 1920s, but the home canning and preserving business can still lead, on occasion, to a modest, but fatal, proliferation of Clostridium botulinum.