Americans Getting Taller, Bigger, Fatter, Says CDC

Americans Getting Taller, Bigger, Fatter, Says CDC Average adult Americans are about one inch taller, but nearly a whopping 25 pounds heavier than they were in 1960, according to a 2002 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The bad news, says CDC is that average BMI (body mass index, a weight-for-height formula used to measure obesity) has increased among adults from approximately 25 in 1960 to 28 in 2002. The report, Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index (BMI) 1960-2002: United States, shows that the average height of a men aged 20-74 years increased from just over 58 in 1960 to 59 and 1/2 in 2002, while the average height of a woman the same age increased from slightly over 53 1960 to 54 in 2002. Meanwhile, the average weight for men aged 20-74 years rose dramatically from 166.3 pounds in 1960 to 191 pounds in 2002, while the average weight for women the same age increased from 140.2 pounds in 1960 to 164.3 pounds in 2002. Though the average weight for men aged 20-39 years increased by nearly 20 pounds over the last four decades, the increase was greater among older men: Men between the ages of 40 and 49 were nearly 27 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Men between the ages of 50 and 59 were nearly 28 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Men between the ages of 60 and 74 were almost 33 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960. As to the average weights for women: Women aged 20-29 were nearly 29 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Women aged 40-49 were about 25 ½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Women aged 60-74 were about 17 ½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960. Meanwhile, the report documented that average weights for children are increasing as well: The average weight for a 10 year-old-boy in 1963 was 74.2 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 85 pounds.The average weight for a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was 77.4 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 88 pounds.A 15-year-old boy weighed 135.5 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight of a boy that age increased to 150.3 pounds.A 15-year-old girl weighed 124.2 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight for a girl that age was 134.4 pounds According to the report, average heights for children increased as well over the past four decades. For example: The average height of a 10-year-old boy in 1963 was 55.2 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old boy had increased to 55.7 inches.The average height of a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was about 55.5 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old girl had increased to 56.4 inches.In 1966, the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 67.5 inches or almost 57 ½; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 68.4 or almost 58 and 1/2.In 1996, the average height of a 15-year-old girl was 63.9 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old girl had not changed significantly (63.8 inches). Average Body Mass Index (BMI) for children and teens has increased as well: In 1963, the average BMI for a 7-year-old boy was 15.9; in 2002 it was 17.0. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 15.8 to 16.6 over the same period.In 1966, the average BMI for a 16-year-old boy was 21.3; in 2002, it was 24.1. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 21.9 to 24.0 over the same period. The BMI is a single number that evaluates an individuals weight status in relation to height. BMI is generally used as the first indicator in assessing body fat and has been the most common method of tracking weight problems and obesity among adults. Even Heavier by 2014 In its latest â€Å"tale-of-the-scale† on Americans, the CDC reported that both men and women had, on average, grown even heavier than in 2002. According to the report â€Å"Anthropometric Reference Data for Children and Adults: United States, 2011–2014,†   the average weight for men over age 20 had increased by 4.7 pounds, from 191 pounds in 2002 to 195.7 pounds in 2014. At the same time, the average weight for men over age 20 increased by 4.2 pounds, from 164.3 pounds in 2002 to 168.5 pounds in 2014.

Americans Getting Taller, Bigger, Fatter, Says CDC

Americans Getting Taller, Bigger, Fatter, Says CDC Average adult Americans are about one inch taller, but nearly a whopping 25 pounds heavier than they were in 1960, according to a 2002 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The bad news, says CDC is that average BMI (body mass index, a weight-for-height formula used to measure obesity) has increased among adults from approximately 25 in 1960 to 28 in 2002. The report, Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index (BMI) 1960-2002: United States, shows that the average height of a men aged 20-74 years increased from just over 58 in 1960 to 59 and 1/2 in 2002, while the average height of a woman the same age increased from slightly over 53 1960 to 54 in 2002. Meanwhile, the average weight for men aged 20-74 years rose dramatically from 166.3 pounds in 1960 to 191 pounds in 2002, while the average weight for women the same age increased from 140.2 pounds in 1960 to 164.3 pounds in 2002. Though the average weight for men aged 20-39 years increased by nearly 20 pounds over the last four decades, the increase was greater among older men: Men between the ages of 40 and 49 were nearly 27 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Men between the ages of 50 and 59 were nearly 28 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Men between the ages of 60 and 74 were almost 33 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960. As to the average weights for women: Women aged 20-29 were nearly 29 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Women aged 40-49 were about 25 ½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Women aged 60-74 were about 17 ½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960. Meanwhile, the report documented that average weights for children are increasing as well: The average weight for a 10 year-old-boy in 1963 was 74.2 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 85 pounds.The average weight for a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was 77.4 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 88 pounds.A 15-year-old boy weighed 135.5 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight of a boy that age increased to 150.3 pounds.A 15-year-old girl weighed 124.2 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight for a girl that age was 134.4 pounds According to the report, average heights for children increased as well over the past four decades. For example: The average height of a 10-year-old boy in 1963 was 55.2 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old boy had increased to 55.7 inches.The average height of a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was about 55.5 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old girl had increased to 56.4 inches.In 1966, the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 67.5 inches or almost 57 ½; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 68.4 or almost 58 and 1/2.In 1996, the average height of a 15-year-old girl was 63.9 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old girl had not changed significantly (63.8 inches). Average Body Mass Index (BMI) for children and teens has increased as well: In 1963, the average BMI for a 7-year-old boy was 15.9; in 2002 it was 17.0. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 15.8 to 16.6 over the same period.In 1966, the average BMI for a 16-year-old boy was 21.3; in 2002, it was 24.1. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 21.9 to 24.0 over the same period. The BMI is a single number that evaluates an individuals weight status in relation to height. BMI is generally used as the first indicator in assessing body fat and has been the most common method of tracking weight problems and obesity among adults. Even Heavier by 2014 In its latest â€Å"tale-of-the-scale† on Americans, the CDC reported that both men and women had, on average, grown even heavier than in 2002. According to the report â€Å"Anthropometric Reference Data for Children and Adults: United States, 2011–2014,†   the average weight for men over age 20 had increased by 4.7 pounds, from 191 pounds in 2002 to 195.7 pounds in 2014. At the same time, the average weight for men over age 20 increased by 4.2 pounds, from 164.3 pounds in 2002 to 168.5 pounds in 2014.

Americans Getting Taller, Bigger, Fatter, Says CDC

Americans Getting Taller, Bigger, Fatter, Says CDC Average adult Americans are about one inch taller, but nearly a whopping 25 pounds heavier than they were in 1960, according to a 2002 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The bad news, says CDC is that average BMI (body mass index, a weight-for-height formula used to measure obesity) has increased among adults from approximately 25 in 1960 to 28 in 2002. The report, Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index (BMI) 1960-2002: United States, shows that the average height of a men aged 20-74 years increased from just over 58 in 1960 to 59 and 1/2 in 2002, while the average height of a woman the same age increased from slightly over 53 1960 to 54 in 2002. Meanwhile, the average weight for men aged 20-74 years rose dramatically from 166.3 pounds in 1960 to 191 pounds in 2002, while the average weight for women the same age increased from 140.2 pounds in 1960 to 164.3 pounds in 2002. Though the average weight for men aged 20-39 years increased by nearly 20 pounds over the last four decades, the increase was greater among older men: Men between the ages of 40 and 49 were nearly 27 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Men between the ages of 50 and 59 were nearly 28 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Men between the ages of 60 and 74 were almost 33 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960. As to the average weights for women: Women aged 20-29 were nearly 29 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Women aged 40-49 were about 25 ½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.Women aged 60-74 were about 17 ½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960. Meanwhile, the report documented that average weights for children are increasing as well: The average weight for a 10 year-old-boy in 1963 was 74.2 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 85 pounds.The average weight for a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was 77.4 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 88 pounds.A 15-year-old boy weighed 135.5 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight of a boy that age increased to 150.3 pounds.A 15-year-old girl weighed 124.2 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight for a girl that age was 134.4 pounds According to the report, average heights for children increased as well over the past four decades. For example: The average height of a 10-year-old boy in 1963 was 55.2 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old boy had increased to 55.7 inches.The average height of a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was about 55.5 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old girl had increased to 56.4 inches.In 1966, the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 67.5 inches or almost 57 ½; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 68.4 or almost 58 and 1/2.In 1996, the average height of a 15-year-old girl was 63.9 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old girl had not changed significantly (63.8 inches). Average Body Mass Index (BMI) for children and teens has increased as well: In 1963, the average BMI for a 7-year-old boy was 15.9; in 2002 it was 17.0. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 15.8 to 16.6 over the same period.In 1966, the average BMI for a 16-year-old boy was 21.3; in 2002, it was 24.1. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 21.9 to 24.0 over the same period. The BMI is a single number that evaluates an individuals weight status in relation to height. BMI is generally used as the first indicator in assessing body fat and has been the most common method of tracking weight problems and obesity among adults. Even Heavier by 2014 In its latest â€Å"tale-of-the-scale† on Americans, the CDC reported that both men and women had, on average, grown even heavier than in 2002. According to the report â€Å"Anthropometric Reference Data for Children and Adults: United States, 2011–2014,†   the average weight for men over age 20 had increased by 4.7 pounds, from 191 pounds in 2002 to 195.7 pounds in 2014. At the same time, the average weight for men over age 20 increased by 4.2 pounds, from 164.3 pounds in 2002 to 168.5 pounds in 2014.

Wild justice Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Wild justice - Term Paper Example The then President, John Kennedy, appointed him the Justice of the Supreme Court on 1963 May. Goldberg considered capital punishment a bad public policy as it could never prevent criminal crimes. He asserted that death penalty levied mainly on specific groups of the society such as the poor, the politically powerless and to some extent, the innocent by misjudgments. Another issue that arose was the fact that most of those affected by the death penalty, were the blacks leading to a racial prejudice. He resolved to end capital punishment starting from the courts as a Supreme Court Justice. According to A Wild Justice (28), the Justice Arthur Goldberg dissected from a decision from the Supreme Court not to hear the death penalty appeal involving Frank Lee Rudolph verses a white woman from Alabama. Rudolph was a black man who had a death penalty for raping a white woman from Alabama. This issue clearly heightened, given the fact that it regarded racism. The then Chief Justice, Earl Warre n, feared taking on the issue as Justice Goldberg and his clerk Dershowitz had already written an extensive memorandum that detailed all the cases of racial discrimination in capital punishments. Goldberg knew it would become very necessary to get as much support as possible for his decent. While keeping a low profile, Goldberg used his clerk, Deshowtz to send his memo about his dissect to various organizations including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (A Wild Justice, 30). The news about Goldberg’s dissection from the Supreme Court’s decision circulated to a suite of offices on the twentieth floor of 10 Columbus Circle in Midtown Manhattan in early November. This was a home to the most important law firm in America, and simply implied that the information was to be in the reach of public consumption. The New York Times wrote about his dissect immediately and praised him terming the move as raising â€Å"a potential far reaching idea† (A Wild Justice, 34). The Nati onal Association for the Advancement of the Colored People Legal Defense Fund was a very successful organization since its formation. It had several legal victories that clearly meant that the Goldberg’s dissect issue could get a serious back up. LDF was a supportive organization about issues that affected the social linings of American Citizens. Lawyers of LDF had won several cases in various social issues. In 1944, LDF lawyers won the Smith vs. Allwright case, in which a decision was made requiring Texas to allow the African Americans to vote in primary elections (A Wild Justice, 32). The support that LDF gave to these social classes was in conjunction with the core role of the organization, that is, to give equal rights to all Americans regardless of race or social status The role of LDF was also manifested in the Morgan verses Virginia case. This 1946 case involved desegregation of interstate buses and the LDF lawyers won. Most Africans had commonly been discriminated in terms of service in state offices. Several movements to avert these social issues had already sprung up and LDF played a major role in the support for this movements. LDF managed to secure victory in a case protecting the African Americans to serve on juries and allowed African Americans to be involved in real estate business and property ownership. The LDF’s lawyers also help in the more serious case involving Martin Luther King, Jr, in which charges of contempt followed his protest of Birmingham segregation. The arguments raised by the LDF’s lawyers enabled the Supreme Court to drop all the charges that stemmed from all the civil rights sit-ins. All of this success made people to believe the power of LDF to be limitless (A Wild Justice, 32). The issue of Goldberg dissection arrived at the LDF and they immediately

The Importance of Parking Lots, and Why Parking is Already So Much Essay

The Importance of Parking Lots, and Why Parking is Already So Much More - Essay Example They take up a significant amount of space and a prevalent wherever a person travels, at least in developed countries. However, in his argument, Ben-Joseph does not take into account the necessity of parking spaces, or the cost of the changes that he argues for. Before a suggestion like his is implemented, our society needs to become less dependent on cars and learn to use the parking spaces that we do have more efficiently. It is true that there are more parking spaces than cars, and Ben-Joseph’s figure of three times as many is probably very accurate. However, does this actually suggest that there are too many? The difficulty that is associated with finding parking at a popular venue suggests otherwise. For example, a parking space study in Bristol, Virginia found that the city needed more parking spaces in its downtown area. Furthermore, the study recommended that a parking building be created that had up to 240 spaces (McGee 2012). The stress and difficulty in finding a pa rking space in some cities is so bad that smartphone applications have been developed to help motorists find a space effectively (Gonzales 2011). These two examples suggest that the current number of parking spaces that are available is not enough in some places, rather than there being an excessive amount, as Ben-Joseph suggests. Another aspect of parking that Ben-Joseph does not take into account is the difference between parking spaces and parking lots. He suggests that there are approximately 800 million parking spaces in the United States, and extrapolates this to mean that parking spaces cover 4,360 square miles. This is not completely true. One only has to look at city streets to see that a large number of parking spaces are not part of parking lots, but are on the side of the road. Often, these are the most important parking spaces to people trying to get somewhere specific. While these spaces do take up the same amount of physical area as a parking space within a lot, remov ing these would not result in more available space. The impression that Ben-Joseph gives of parking lots sprawling across the country, blotting the landscape and taking up substantial amounts of space may be true. However, the level at which this occurs is not as dire as he suggests. As a potential solution to the ‘problem’ of parking lots, Ben-Joseph argues that parking lots themselves need to be transformed. He considers that there needs to be a greater focus on appearance, public uses and the environment. However, there are two problems with this proposed solution. The first is the associated cost. The way that parking lots are created is largely due to the relatively low cost. In terms of both time and money, it is much cheaper to create a flat, paved lot with the required lines, markers and other components, than it would be to create one that is more aesthetically pleasing. Even the simplest approach of landscaping the area would cost. The second problem is that r evamping car lots in this way would also decrease the number of parking spaces that they provide. This is a significant problem, as parking spaces are an important component of our society, and many people rely on them in order to store their car while they work. An alternative solution to the perspective that Ben-Joseph proposes a two-pronged approach, where the use of parking spaces is optimized and transportation via cars is decreased. The smartphone application for determining