While lower intelligence scores — as reflected by low results on written or oral tests of IQ — have been associated with a raised risk of cardiovascular disease, no study has so far compared the relative strength of this association with other established risk factors such as obesity, smoking and high blood pressure.
Now, a large study funded by Britain’s Medical Research Council, which set out to gauge the relative importance of IQ alongside other risk factors, has found that lower intelligence scores were associated with higher rates of cardiovascular disease and total mortality at a greater level of magnitude than found with any other risk factor except smoking…
When the data were applied to a statistical model to quantify the associations of nine risk factors with cardiovascular mortality, results showed that the most important was cigarette smoking, followed by low IQ. Similar results were apparent when the health outcome was total mortality.
I wonder if the addition of firearms worship could predict the eventual Darwinian disappearance of right-wing nutballs?
#60 birddog, I really have no qualms about seeing you make fine use of such high technology as copy-and-paste, but the classy thing is to cite the source:
http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndpur.html
If nothing else, someone may be interested in reading the rest of the arguments by the same author.
#58, What #60 said.
You should also read up on why the 14th was passed. The strongest reason behind it was the southern states were taking away the individual rights of black people to possess firearms and thus defend themselves from those who would put them back in chains.
You don’t hear that in today’s commentaries.
#47 @Canucklehead said, “freedom of speech has no correlation with gun ownership.”
Wrong. It has EVERYTHING to do with it. The founding fathers made the Second Amendment the right to bear arms for a reason. It’s the one that protects all our other freedoms like free speech, press, assembly & religion. Which aren’t worth the parchment they are printed on if you don’t have the means to defend them.
We need the government to be afraid of its citizens. We want our rulers to think carefully about what they try to take from us. We need to remember that they can only take from us what we give them.
Maybe Eideard or Obama”fever” the liberal can call the police against a gang-banger. But, who does he call against the police?
I may not like what you have to say but I will defend your right to say it.
¡Viva la Revolucion!
but first this word from our sponsors…
Whenever I see Charlton Heston’s photo and read the apparently mandatory comments attacking him, I happily recall his 1971 movie which depicted life in ObamaNation USA. I’m sure those of a “certain age” will recall it. It’s title is “Omega Man.” I can recommend it as a great rental or download.
#62 gary I want to congratulate you on learning to use google….and I would post a link but from the iq level of this forum I doubt anyone could figure it out.
#64 Tito — how do you explain that Canadians have no Constitutional right to bear arms, have a very low rate of gun ownership, and yet enjoy a more Free Press than the US? There are many other examples.
btw — hint — expand your horizons beyond your one single country. You might learn something.
No “science” was used (but greatly harmed) in the making of this study.
“1145 men and women aged around 55 and followed up for 20 years”
-so the latest medical “gospel” for 6.5+billion people is based on a sample of 1145 people “around 55yrs of age”? Did they factor the exact type of foods they were eating?
During the time period of the study, (1987-2007) the U.K. started importing GMO foods stuffs of which in the case of GM soy, 51% of Brits became allergic to within five years.. (you *are* what you eat..)
There many other factors (left out) -that all of western science either ignores or denies playing a roll in biology, let alone health, that any study today, especially one that uses *easily manipulated statistical models* -is completely useless. -save for one area: saving or making money.
Britain is trying to figure out how to lower its social health service costs and this study just handed them a way to do just that. (and of course, introduce another few levels of class warfare to the political war chest)
-the long term ramifications of this study, if taken seriously, are pretty ugly.
-s
(please ‘xcuse the weird grammar flow, i’m tired)
E-Tard is done for then! Yeah!