Eureka said: Venus of Willendorf's waist to height ratio was 1.6. (however she ever came into this thread).
Shhhh...she might be pregnant. One theory is that she represents earliest known example of pornography. Therefore, she may be more the imaginatively "clay-shopped" erotic ideal of one individual, than realistic depiction of actual human female of that time and realm. The reason why she came into this thread is that Ego once stated that it was his position that anybody with a BMI over 25 should pay higher health insurance premiums, and since I am a very frugal person with a BMI of 27, a Waist-to-Height ratio of .47, a Waist-to-Hip ratio of .72, resting pulse of 58, consistently low normal blood pressure, very good blood sugar and cholesterol results, and ability to squat right down azz-to-grass no problem, this practice, if enacted would, IMHO, amount to financial discrimination against myself and all other heavy-hipped women. Not all of us were meant to run along side the antelope and then throw spear with enough power to pierce its hide. Some of us were meant to provide in utero nourishment to ridiculously large-brained species, and then squat down and somehow release that giant brain-case out of our body, then trudge along for miles every day with baby on hip or at breast, sack full of dried mulberries on back, and poking stick with which to stab some lizard meat. Because the antelope runners are no good if they can't run, the Goddess gave them a hormonal profile that causes their hearts to explode when they stop running. Since the heavy-hipped trudgers are still useful for a while longer into middle-age, the Goddess gave us a hormonal profile that keeps our hearts going as long as we keep trudging. Of course, it's a bit more complex than that, but another sign is that a few years before one of the antelope runners hearts is about to explode, the Goddess puts a curse on him that renders him pretty much incapable of fathering another child.
FBeyer said: An observation that suffers from family wise error rate, confounding variables, and small-sample extremes.
True-ish. I would agree that statistics should be limited to large populations, but that goes for both generation and application. Once you are faced with a given individual, inclusive of a variety of known facts about this individual, then application of any statistically generated metric may become more or less moot. AND, the main point I am trying to make, and actually in agreement with Ego's stance in his 1st World Problems thread, is that it is a ridiculous procedure to reduce a complex human problem down to a measurement that can be made a laboratory, and then offer the laboratory procedure as simplistic prescription for a complex problem. Why do people not enjoy running on a treadmill? Maybe for some or many, it is because it makes them uncomfortably aware of their physical limitations, but for many other people, including many of those who also experience pain from the activity, it is also dead boring activity. Maybe, just maybe, that message from your brain and body that an activity is boring is actually one that should be acknowledged as valid. Maybe people should be encouraged to engage in more complex activities even if they aren't as efficient at quickly raising heart and respiration rate to strenuous aerobic level because that would improve both compliance and complex development and co-ordination of various physiological factors.
