Seriously? Someone actually did a study on this and got published in a fairly good journal? I so need to get on this slipping sleigh.
[box]
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The term 'beer belly' expresses the common belief that beer consumption is a major determinant of waist circumference (WC). We studied the gender-specific associations between beer consumption and WC (partially in relation to body weight and hip circumference (HC) change).
PARTICIPANTS/METHODS: Within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Potsdam study (7876 men, 12 749 women), cross-sectional associations were investigated applying general linear models. Prospective analyses of baseline beer consumption and an 8.5-year WC change were assessed using multivariate general linear models and polytomous logistic regression. To test the site-specific effect of beer consumption on WC, an adjustment for concurrent changes in body weight and HC was carried out. In addition, the relationship between change in beer consumption and change in WC was studied.
RESULTS: A positive association in men and no association in women were seen between beer consumption and WC at baseline. Men consuming 1000 ml/d beer were at 17% higher risk for WC gain compared with very light consumers. Significantly lower odds for WC gain (odds ratio=0.88; 95% confidence interval 0.81, 0.96) were found in beer-abstaining women than in very-light-drinking women. The adjustment for concurrent body weight and HC change diminished effect estimates notably, explaining most of the association between beer and change in WC. Decreasing beer consumption was related to higher relative odds for WC loss, although not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Beer consumption leads to WC gain, which is closely related to concurrent overall weight gain. This study does not support the common belief of a site-specific effect of beer on the abdomen, the beer belly.
[/box]
I have no idea what they set out to achieve. I hunted the paper down and read through their justification for the study and I see this weak unreferenced statement in the introduction:
Abdominal obesity is one of the most potent cardiovascular risk factors, making it of interest to understand whether beer consumption increases the risk of this site-specific fat patterning.
First, abdominal obesity was never really "the most potent risk factor" of cardiovascular disease as they claim. Second, there are a million other "potent risk factors" for cardiovascular disease and abdominal obesity figures rather low on that list. Third, there are strong hormonal, genetic and gender-related determinants of who accumulates fat near their bellies and who doesn't. Ignoring this fact completely in the justification section is rather dodgy.
Most importantly, doesn't every one pretty much know that Beer is just empty calories and that consumption without exercise will lead to weight gain? Was it so essential to wade in, and analyze a huge dataset to death just to show that it does lead to weight gain and is not really specifically associated with Beer Bellies?
What is the message they are trying to convey to the public anyway - that it is okay to drink Beer because you will only gain weight, and not grow a Belly? A truly "what-the-hell-do-epidemiologists-do-when-they-are-out-drinking-beer" study. Maybe I should start drinking beer now and coming up with random publication ideas. Or maybe I should just get that soymilk carton I have been craving and start drinking with abandon. The effect will be eerily similar to drinking beer.
Of course, being recognized for it in the face of enormous odds of sinking into oblivion, is a fairytale and a real one. But really, that is very thin justification for casting that chirpie unreal disney fairytale fluff woman. I think the movie could have done on the "Julie side" with a lot more grittiness and conviction - would have made it happier, ironically.
Did you get the DVD with the Bonus Disc? It was more expensive,but my mom and I watched it the other night over Chinese Take out. Go Figure! Anyhow. This movie really got me thinking about the courage Julia Child had and what she did for American Cooking. As well as blogging, but I mentioned that in my post. The extras were cool. There was a 90 minute best of the best with Julia Child. Merryl Streep did an amazing job. Rene Zellwiger definately can do train wrecks better than most. Have you seen New In Town? Very funny. I did like Amy Adams in both rolls. Although during the meltdowns a page from Bridget Jones would have made for an intreguing possiblity. Although the real Julie did not seem the same as either might have portrayed her.
Hehehe, I didn't say I dislike Adams, in fact I think she was way beyond AWESOME in Enchanted (which I LOVED!) but it is just that the original author of Julie and Julia was not as privileged or "sophisticated" as the real Julia Child seems to be. She was forced to blog at a time when her life was full of negatives.
I know they tried to portray it in the movie, but I am really critical of cooking movies, so I felt something was missing in sarcasm and darkness that goes into cooking usually - on Julie's side. It was too sunny. Sometimes, humour is just dark. Cooking humour is almost 90% dark. I simple HATED that movie "No reservations" because it was terrible in my opinion. I liked this movie but I couldn't identify with any of the cooking or the chefs, and that took away something from the movie. Maybe I had too high expectations... But the movie, on the whole, was beautiful.
The cinematography was amazing, the colours popped everywhere, the sets were detailed and really picture perfect!
I'm sorry you are so wrong but Amy Adams was perfect for that movie! I loved the movie and i loved her. But i always love her so maybe i am bias. But i love that movie!